Notinger v. Brown (In re Brown), 2008 BNH 006 (declaring that the individual debtor held a beneficial interest in a vacant parcel of real estate under theories of resulting and constructive trusts and ordering the legal title holder to transfer title to the trustee pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 542; declaring that the individual debtor did not hold a beneficial interest in the home in which he lived on an adjoining parcel as he did not hold a beneficial interest in this real estate which was held in an express trust; and avoiding as constructively fraudulent under 11 U.S.C. § 544(b) and NH RSA 545/A:4(I)(b) transfers made by the corporate debtor that benefitted the parcels of real estate in which the individual debtor lived and permitting the value of such transfers to be recovered from the individual debtor and the legal title holders of the parcels pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 550(a)).
You are here
Opinions
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 Newfound Lake Marina, Inc., 2008 BNH 005 (valuing the debtors’ marina property at its fair market value in its highest and best use as a dockominium for purposes of determining a secured creditor’s interest in such property pursuant to 11 U.S.C.§ 506(a)(1) and (b) and adopting a narrow construction of the “equities of the case” language in 11 U.S.C. § 552(b)(1); denying the debtor’s request to borrow certain funds).
Come v. Route 4 Motors, Inc. (In re Come), 2008 BNH 003 (determining that a creditor who was on notice of the automatic stay and who intended the action that violated the stay, in this case the repossession of the debtor’s automobile, committed a willful violation of the stay under § 362(k)(1) and Fleet Mortgage Group, Inc. v. Kaneb (In re Kaneb), 196 F.3d 265 (1st Cir. 1999), even though the creditor erroneously believed that the stay had been lifted).
Pysz v. Hawkins (In re Pysz), 2008 BNH 004 (granting summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs in their preference avoidance action and avoiding the defendant’s judicial lien pursuant to 11 U.S.C.§ 547(b) because there is no genuine issue that the debtor was insolvent and would receive more with the judicial lien than without the lien in a Chapter 7 case, in accordance with 11 U.S.C.§ 547(b)(3) and (5)).
In re O’Neil, 2008 BNH 002 (denying the debtor’s motion to convert from Chapter 7 to Chapter 13 because the debtor’s unsecured debt exceeds the limit set forth in 11 U.S.C. § 109(e), and finding that the debtor’s postpetition conduct does not amount to bad faith as discussed in Marrama v. Citizens Bank of Massachusetts, 127 S.Ct. 1105 (2007)).
In re Pageau, 383 B.R. 221 (Bankr. D.N.H. 2008) (concluding the debtor did not rebut the presumption of abuse under 11 U.S.C. § 707(b)(2)(B) as she failed to establish any special circumstances that would warrant the inclusion of the debtor’s monthly student loan obligation on Form B22A, the means test form, as an additional expense for which there is no reasonable alternative).
Askenaizer v. Seacoast Redimix Concrete, LLC (In re Charwill Construction, Inc.), 2007 BNH 045 (granting summary judgment in favor of the defendant/subcontractor pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 547(c)(1) because the defendant’s release of lien rights against the project owner in a bonded, public construction project, in exchange for certain payments, constituted contemporaneously exchanged “new value” to the debtor and thus, the payments cannot be avoided under 11 U.S.C.§ 547(b)).
Flash Island, Inc. v. Whispering Pines Estate, Inc. (In re Whispering Pines Estate, Inc.), 2007 BNH 044 (deferring the Court’s final ruling on the creditor’s motion for relief pending the debtor’s Chapter 11 confirmation hearing, but finding that there is no equity in the subject real property and that the creditor’s secured status is impaired under the plan).
Notinger v. Brown (In re Simply Media, Inc.), 2007 BNH 043 (setting forth the procedural requirements under FRCP 38 and the substantive requirements under the Seventh Amendment and Supreme Court precedent regarding a party’s right to a jury trial in bankruptcy on claims for fraudulent transfer, constructive trust, turnover, unjust enrichment, civil conspiracy, abuse of process, tortious interference, breach of fiduciary duty, and unfair and deceptive business practices).
In re Gagne, 378 B.R. 439 (Bankr. D.N.H. 2007) (overruling the debtor’s objection to the mortgagee’s claim on the grounds that only 11 U.S.C. § 1322(e), and not 11 U.S.C. § 506(b), determines the amount a debtor must pay to cure an arrearage through a chapter 13 plan and concluding that under NH state law and the terms of the debtor’s mortgage the attorney’s fees and costs requested by the mortgagee in this case were reasonable and must be paid through the debtor’s plan).