Voisine v. Sperry Concrete, Inc. (In re Voisine), 2003 BNH 015 (applying Cohen v. De La Cruz, 523 U.S. 213 (1998) in finding that the Creditor may seek any debt arising from the nondischargeable claim including but not limited to attorney fees, interest and/or costs recoverable on that debt under applicable state law).
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 Spike Broadband Sys., Inc., 2003 BNH 016 (applying Virginia law and holding that a former officer’s claim for damages based upon the Debtor’s alleged breach of an employment agreement was barred by res judicata because it was not divisible from claims previously adjudicated by the state court under the same contract).
Hamilton v. Hemar (In re Hamilton), 2003 BNH 014 (applying the three-part test of In re Brunner and denying the Debtor’s complaint to discharge her educational loans with The Educational Resource, Inc. pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(8) because the Debtor did not demonstrate that her current inability to repay will continue for a significant portion of the repayment period).
Pasteurized Eggs Corp. v. Bon Dente Joint Venture (In re Pasteurized Eggs Corp.), 296 B.R. 283 (Bankr. D.N.H. 2003) ((1) holding that even though the assignor retained a reversionary interest in certain patents and reserved rights to protect its interest in the patents if the assignee failed to do so, the agreement was an absolute assignment of the patents rather than a mere license; (2) holding that the Court did not need to decide whether the retained reversionary interest was a security interest in a patent, because the assignor had not taken any action to perfect a security interest in a patent; and (3) adopting Cybernetic Servs., Inc. v. Matsco, Inc. (In re Cybernetic Servs., Inc.), 252 F.3d 1039, 1044 (9th Cir. 2001), which held that a security interest in a patent must be perfected in accordance with Article 9 of the UCC).
Dahar v. Brewster (In re Brewster), 2003 BNH 012 (after the expiration of a statute of limitations under applicable nonbankruptcy law the trustee moved to amend his complaint as of the date of the original complaint; the Court ruled (1) that the amendment would not relate back to the date of filing of the complaint under Rule 15(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure when the defendant had neither actual nor constructive notice of his claim and (2) even if applicable nonbankruptcy law might bar a claim against a decedent’s estate in state court, the Trustee was not barred from maintaining a preference action in bankruptcy court).
In re Pow Wow River Campground, Inc., 296 B.R. 81 (Bankr. D.N.H. 2003) (awarding attorney fees under 11 U.S.C. § 503(b) for creditor’s “substantial contribution” to Chapter 11 plan, where creditor’s involvement directly led to a significant increase in the dividend to unsecured creditors).
Atcco Mortgage, Inc. v. Morley In re Morley, 292 B.R. 446 (Bankr. D.N.H. 2003) (applying Virginia law in finding that a prepetition settlement agreement would not be rescinded for fraud due to (1) defendant’s lack of intent and (2) plaintiff’s unreasonable reliance on defendant’s misrepresentation; sustaining in part the debtor’s objection to a secured claim).
Peterson v. Peterson (In re Peterson), 292 B.R. 228 (Bankr. D.N.H. 2003) (finding that the Debtor’s obligations to his ex-spouse for (1) child support, (2) uninsured medical expenses, (3) educational expenses, and (4) attorney’s fees incurred in connection with the ex-spouse’s efforts to collect alimony, maintenance, and child support from the Debtor are excepted from discharge pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5)).
Premier Capital v. Diamond (In re Diamond), 2003 BNH 008 (denying the Plaintiff’s six count complaint seeking to deny the Debtor’s discharge pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 727(a)(2)(A) and (4), holding that the requisite intent to hinder, delay or defraud a creditor could not be inferred from the facts and circumstances of the case and that the omissions and discrepancies in the bankruptcy schedules were not knowingly and fraudulently made false oaths).
Boots v. New Hampshire Higher Educ. Assistance Found. (In re Boots), 2003 BNH 007 (applying the three prong Brunner test and finding the repayment of the Debtor’s student loan debt, held by New Hampshire Higher Education Assistance Foundation and Sallie Mae Servicing Center, would be an undue hardship and is discharged pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(8)).