Type: Amicus
Date: June 16, 2016
Description: Whether Chapter 13 debtors have a free-standing duty to amend their bankruptcy schedules to reflect the post-petition acquisition of a legal claim. Whether judicial estoppel is appropriately applied against former Chapter 13 debtors who attempt to amend their bankruptcy schedules.
Results: Pending
Fifth Circuit Applies Judicial Estoppel Doctrine
In a disturbing trend favoring personal injury defendants over debtors who, without actual intent to deceive, fail to inform the bankruptcy court of a potential lawsuit, the Fifth Circuit applied the doctrine of judicial estoppel to prevent the debtor from benefiting from her state lawsuit. Flugence v. Axis Surplus Ins.(In re Flugence), No. 13-30073 (5th Cir. Oct. 4, 2013). [Read more…] about Fifth Circuit Applies Judicial Estoppel Doctrine
Ninth and Tenth Circuits Differ on Judicial Estoppel Considerations
When determining whether judicial estoppel should be applied in cases where a debtor has failed to disclose a pending lawsuit in her bankruptcy schedules, the ninth circuit expanded the inquiry into what constitutes “inadvertence” or “mistake” to include a subjective component. [Read more…] about Ninth and Tenth Circuits Differ on Judicial Estoppel Considerations