You are here


The District of New Hampshire offers a database of opinions issued from 1999 to present. For a more detailed search, enter a keyword or case number in the search box above.

In re Vrusho, 2021 BNH 006 (denying creditor’s motion under Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3002(c)(6)(A) for leave to file proof of claim after bar date based on insufficient notice, where: (i) creditor’s attorney in related state court collection proceeding received actual notice of commencement of case and claims bar date, (ii) sufficient nexus existed between attorney’s representation of creditor in state court proceeding and creditor’s proof of claim, (iii) creditor’s attorney informed creditor of bankruptcy case, and accordingly, (iv) actual notice of bankruptcy filing and bar date was imputed to creditor).

In re Delong, 2021 BNH 005 (denying the debtor’s motion to avoid a creditor’s lien under 11 U.S.C. § 522(f) as the debtor could not include an exemption of his non-debtor spouse in the lien avoidance calculation).

In re Hopkins, 2021 BNH 004 (sustaining the chapter 13 trustee’s objection to the debtor’s claim of a homestead exemption under NH RSA 480:3-a on account of his deceased spouse’s interest in the homestead, as RSA 480:3-a applies to protect surviving spouses who do not have an ownership interest in their residence at the time of the homeowner’s death; here, the debtor was only entitled to claim a homestead exemption on account of his ownership interest in the property pursuant to RSA 480:1).

Mission Product Holdings, Inc. v. Schleicher & Stebbins Hotels, L.L.C. (In re Old Cold, LLC), 2021 BNH 003 (denying leave to amend complaint on futility grounds because proposed amended claims were either precluded by final sale order, application of the doctrine of collateral estoppel, or expiration of statute of limitations).

In re Corson, 2021 BNH 002 (in sustaining the chapter 7 Trustee’s objection to the priority treatment of the creditor’s unsecured proof of claim for guardian ad litem fees under 11 U.S.C. § 507(a)(1)(A) and (a)(1)(B), the court determined that: (1) the creditor, who served as the court-appointed guardian ad litem in the debtor’s divorce proceeding, was not a “legal guardian” within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 101(14A)(A)(i) and, accordingly, that the claim was not a “domestic support obligation” as defined by 11 U.S.C. § 101(14A)(A)-(D) entitled to priority treatment under 11 U.S.C. § 507(a)(1)(A) and (a)(1)(B)).

In re Pitbull Realty Grp. Inc., 2021 BNH 001 (overruling debtor’s objection to creditors’ scheduled claims where the creditors were not required to file a proof of claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 3003(b)(1) and (c)(2) and holding that the debtor failed to produce substantial evidence to overcome the scheduled claims’ prima facie validity where the debtor conceded that it had no dispute with respect to the merits of the claims).

Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC v. Town of Bartlett (In re Edward Charles Furlong, III), 620 B.R. 422 (Bankr. D.N.H. 2020) (court will not apply doctrine of equitable subrogation to reorder relative priorities of mortgage and intervening attachment/judgment lien where such application would prejudice the rights of the attaching/judgment creditor who relied on the relative mortgage/lien priorities on record at the registry of deeds).

In re Lally, 612 B.R. 246 (Bankr. D.N.H. 2020) issued February 28, 2020 (holding that under 11 U.S.C. § 330(a)(7), the graduated percentage commission of § 326 is presumptively reasonable compensation for the chapter 7 trustee; commission base does not include distributions of property that is not property of the estate; in reviewing fee applications for counsel to trustees, court will take particular care to ensure that counsel does not seek reimbursement for non-delegable tasks of the chapter 7 trustee.

Kriss v. U. S. (IRS) (In re Kriss), 2019 BNH 003, issued Sept. 27, 2019, amended Oct. 1, 2019 (unpublished) (granting in part and denying in part defendant United States of America’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, as follows: (1) debts arising from untimely filed federal income tax returns were excepted from discharge pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(1)(B); (2) debts consisting of unpaid post-petition interest on priority claims that were paid in full through debtor’s chapter 13 plan were excepted from discharge pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1328(a)(2) and 507(a)(8)(C); (3) genuine issue of material fact existed as to whether post-discharge notices sent by IRS to the debtor relating to tax years 2008-2011 violated discharge injunction of 11 U.S.C. § 524(a)(2), precluding judgment on the pleadings; (4) IRS had not waived sovereign immunity with respect to emotional distress damage claim, entitling the defendant to judgment on the pleadings, and (5) debtor stated plausible claim for attorney’s fees, costs, and sanctions, precluding judgment on the pleadings).

Morris v. Massachusetts Educ. Fin. Auth. (In re Morris), 2019 BNH 002 (holding that the repayment of the debtor’s student loan debt would not impose an undue hardship within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(8) where the debtor’s household income would be sufficient to cover his student loans payments if the debtor were able to obtain another restaurant job making roughly the same money he made before he voluntarily left his last position).