Comtois v. MAK Investments, LLC (In re Comtois), 2007 BNH 022 (finding that the defendant’s violations of NH RSA 358-K, NH RSA 399-B and it’s failure to accurately disclose to the debtors the nature of the form of the security for a prepetition loan were all violations of the New Hampshire Consumer Protection Act, NH RSA 358-A, and awarding statutory damages).
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 Wyatt, 369 B.R. 99 (Bankr. D.N.H. 2007) (denying creditor's motions to seal the court's docket and to hold hearings in camera because the movant failed to show justification for such measures under 11 U.S.C. § 107; denying creditor's motion to reconsider disallowance of his claim because the motion to reconsider was untimely, the creditor failed to show cause under 11 U.S.C. § 502(j), and the former conservator's due process rights were not violated; denying creditor's motion to convert case to Chapter 7 because the order confirming the plan has res judicata effect with regard to the debtor's eligibility for Chapter 13 relief).
Wagner v. Stanko (In re Stanko), 2007 BNH 019 (denying motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) because, at this point in the litigation, the plaintiff's claims arising from a contract between the two parties are viable).
Askenaizer v. May (In re Jewett), 2007 BNH 018 (finding that the debtor’s prepetition transfer of real property to a third party within 90 days before filing bankruptcy could not be avoided by the Trustee under § 548(a)(1)(B) because at the time of the transfer the debtor held that property in a resulting trust, as defined by New Hampshire state law, in favor of the third party and, therefore, the property could not become property of the estate because the debtor held only legal title but had no equitable interest).
Rivers Edge Condo. Homeowners Ass’n v. Cohen (In re Cohen), 370 B.R. 26 (Bankr. D.N.H. 2007) (denying summary judgment because neither res judicata nor collateral estoppel give plaintiff's state court default judgment preclusive effect in the bankruptcy court and because material issues of fact are in dispute).
Netria Corp. v. Graham (In re Graham), 363 B.R. 32 (Bankr. D.N.H. 2007) (granting plaintiff's motion for summary judgment excepting from discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6) unliquidated debt for willful and malicious injury arising from the misappropriation of trade secrets and spoliation of evidence; granting plaintiff's motions to strike three of the debtor/defendant's pleadings pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f); granting plaintiff's motion for relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1), which will allow the superior court to determine the amount of damages and enter final judgment).
Comtois v. MAK Investments, LLC (In re Comtois), 363 B.R. 336 (Bankr. D.N.H. 2007) (granting a motion for partial summary judgment where: (1) the creditor violated NH RSA 358-K by failing to properly state the rate of interest and the method of calculating interest in a closed end consumer loan, and (2) the creditor violated NH RSA 399-B by failing to properly disclose the total cost of interest at the inception of a closed end consumer loan; and denying summary judgment (3) on damages and/or the remedy for violations of NH RSA 358-K and 399-B because the statutes do not provide an express civil remedy and the available remedies would be considered at the trial on the claims for violation of NH RSA 358-A, and (4) on aof NH RSA 398-A requiring a person who deals in second mortgage loans to be licensed because under the undisputed facts of the case, the execution and delivery into escrow of a warranty deed without conditions together with the execution of a loan and escrow agreement did not constitute a mortgage under NH RSA 479:1).
In re Hartwick, 359 B.R. 16 (Bankr. D.N.H. 2007) (finding that under § 707(b)(2)(A)(iii) an above median debtor who is required to complete the expense portion of the means test form (Form B22A) may deduct all payments on all secured debts that are scheduled as contractually due on the petition date regardless of whether the debtor later surrenders the property or reaffirms the debt and retains the property).
Smith v. George (In re RCK Modular Homes Systems, Inc.) and Smith v. George (In re Kostandin), 363 B.R. 29 (Bankr. D.N.H. 2007) (plaintiff/trustee's complaints survive defendants' motions to dismiss because (1) at least at this point, the trustee appears to have standing to pursue malpractice and fraud claims, (2) the trustee has pled sufficient facts to allege fraudulent transfer based on a constructive fraud theory, and (3) there are no grounds to dismiss the count for breach of contract).
Flanagan v. Howard (In re Howard), 361 B.R. 20 (Bankr. D.N.H. 2007) (judgment for the debtor/defendant because plaintiff failed to prove any of her 11 U.S.C. §§ 523 (seeking to except certain debts from discharge) and 727 (seeking to deny discharge altogether) claims by a preponderance of the evidence).