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 Wunderlich, 2010 BNH 023 (reducing the amount of interim fees requested by the trustee because a pro se creditor spent numerous hours investigating the assets of the Debtor and is responsible for obtaining a significant amount of the assets in the case).

Mosher v. Evergreen Mgmt., Inc. (In re Mosher), 2010 BNH 022 (awarding attorneys' fees to Debtor where Defendant willfully violated the automatic stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362, but tempering award for reasonableness; and denying Defendant's motion for directed verdict).

Gembitsky v. DeSteph (In re DeSteph), 2010 BNH 021 (finding in favor of the Plaintiff on her breach of contract and fraud claims, and imposing a constructive trust on Defendant's vehicle because he violated a duty imposed by a confidential and fiduciary relationship when he failed to use the Plaintiff's money as instructed, but denying complaint as to all other counts; and finding that the Defendant's obligation to the Plaintiff is excepted from discharge in his bankruptcy).

Westbrook v. Westbrook (In re Westbrook), 2010 BNH 020 (granting motion to dismiss the complaint for non-dischargeability because Plaintiff's underlying claim of fraud is time-barred).

In re Amoskeag Inn Corporation, 2010 BNH 019 (granting motion to compel Choice Hotels International, Inc., to comply with terms of a franchise agreement because the franchise agreement had not been terminated prior to the filing of the Debtor's bankruptcy).

U.S. Trustee v. Perrotta (In re Perrotta), 2010 BNH 018 (denying the debtor’s motion to dismiss the U.S. Trustee’s amended complaint as untimely where the debtor asked the court to treat the motion as a motion for summary judgment under Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7012 because: (1) the record still left genuine issues of material fact regarding the U.S. Trustee’s knowledge of evidence to support the amended counts and (2) the debtor had not demonstrated any prejudice in the U.S. Trustee’s alleged delay in filing the amended complaint).

In re O’Neil, 2010 BNH 017 (denying motion for determination that proceeds from sale of debtor's stock in his business should not be part of the bankruptcy estate, because marital court's order appointing a receiver did not effectively attach debtor's stock and did not divest the debtor of legal title in the stock so as to prevent the stock from passing into the bankruptcy estate).

In re Visconti, 426 B.R. 422 (Bankr. D.N.H. 2010) (sustaining the chapter 7 trustee’s objection to the debtor’s claim of a homestead exemption under NH RSA 480:1 because, while the debtor lived in the property on the petition date, he had no ownership interest in the home and was not married to the owner when he filed for bankruptcy).

Total Pride Landscaping, Inc. v. Continental Paving, Inc. et al (In re Total Pride Landscaping, Inc.), 2010 BNH 015 (holding that a pile of organic compost sitting on the defendants’ land was property of the debtor’s estate under 11 U.S.C. § 541 and subject to turnover under 11 U.S.C. § 542; holding that defendants violated the automatic stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362(a)(3) when they refused to turn over the compost pile or to provide the debtor with access for its removal but declining to award damages due to insufficient evidence; declining to award statutory damages for defendants’ counterclaims for timber trespass under NH RSA § 227-J:8 because damaged trees were not on the defendants’ land but awarding compensatory damages for restoration costs).

In re Corbett, 425 B.R. 51 (Bankr. D.N.H. 2010) (denying a motion to reopen a no-asset chapter 7 case to add omitted creditors under the procedure derived from In re Walker, 195 B.R. 187 (Bankr. D.N.H. 1996) in light of Colonial Surety Co. v. Weizman, 564 F.3d 526 (1st Cir. 2009) because Weizman places the burden on the debtor to show cause that the omission was innocent and the equities justify reopening; debtors must file a verified motion or affidavit providing enough factual detail to justify reopening, after which the Court would issue an order to reopen giving notice to creditors).