Bezanson v. Thomas (In re R & R Assocs. of Hampton), 2003 BNH 036 (On remand, denying the allegation of Count II, finding that the Defendants who represented both the general partners of the Debtor and the Debtor under Chapter 11, whose case subsequently converted to Chapter 7, did not breach their fiduciary duty and that the Defendants’ legal representation of the Debtor was not negligent).
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.
Atlantic Orient Corp. v. AOC Energy LLC, et al (In re Atlantic Orient Corp.), 2003 BNH 035 (holding that claim preclusion, issue preclusion and Fed. R. Civ. P. 13(a) did not bar the defendant from asserting that it had either a prior license or that the technology was in the public domain as a defense to a Motion for Contempt for violation of a permanent injunction).
Davis v. Davis (In re Davis), 2003 BNH 033 (holding that (1) the debtor’s obligation of $135,000 to former spouse was a property settlement and not alimony, maintenance or support and therefore dischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5); and (2) based on the evidence presented, the debt was excepted from discharge pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6)).
MacMillan v. United States (In re MacMillan), 2003 BNH 034 (overruling the debtors’ objection to the IRS’s claim because the debtors failed to produce sufficient evidence to rebut the IRS’s prima facie case and to meet their burden of proving that the IRS’s tax deficiency assessment was erroneous).
In re Chase, 2003 BNH 032 (sustaining creditors’ objection to the debtor’s claim of homestead exemption under NH RSA 480:1 as the debtor’s absence from her home in the period prior to her incarceration was not involuntary and temporary but rather voluntary and indefinite).
In re River Valley Fitness One Limited Partnership, 2003 BNH 031 (overruling objections to the competing plans of reorganization based upon allegations that the both plans were not proposed in good faith under section 1129(a)(3) and that the Debtor’s Plan did not satisfy the classification standards articulated in In re Granada Wines, 748 F.2d 42 (1st Cir. 1984) by separately classifying certain unsecured claims; finding both competing plans to be confirmable and applying section 1129(c) to confirm the Debtor’s Plan because the treatment of creditors was superior, the creditors preferred the Debtor’s Plan and there was less operational risk).
Smith v. Kessler Farm Condo Ass’n (In re Kiely), 2003 BNH 030 (ruling that the condominium association had a non-priority, general unsecured claim for outstanding prepetition condominium fees based on the facts and despite the association’s policy to apply funds to the oldest outstanding fees first; the association was unable to establish that its claim was entitled to priority under 11 U.S.C. §§ 503(b)(1)(A) and 507(a)(1)).
In re Morley, 2003 BNH 029 (holding that a settlement agreement executed in connection with the debtor’s previous bankruptcy limited the creditor’s recourse to recovery from the debtor’s real property and thus the creditor’s previously liquidated general unsecured claim had to be disallowed in its entirety).
In re Timothy Carroll, DMD, P.C., 2003 BNH 028 (sustaining an objection to a proof of claim filed by a guarantor for reimbursement amounts not yet paid under a personal guarantee and disallowing the claim under section 502(e)(1)(B) as a contingent claim).
In re Dodson, 2003 BNH 027 (denying a motion to “reconsider” under FRCP 60(b)(5) because the Chapter 13 debtor failed to demonstrate that it was inequitable for the Court to grant relief from the automatic stay under LBR 9071-1(a) based upon a stipulation for adequate protection approved three years earlier because the debtor had not shown a significant change in either factual conditions or in law as required by Rufo v. Inmates of Suffolk County Jail, 502 U.S. 367 (1992)).