Keathley v. Buddy Ayers Construction, Inc.
- Summarized by Caleb Chaplain , U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Western District of Virginia
- 11 months 2 weeks ago
- Case Type:
- Consumer
- Case Status:
- Affirmed
- Citation:
- 24-60025 (5th Circuit, Mar 03,2025) Published
- Tag(s):
-
- Ruling:
- The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment on grounds of judicial estoppel, as well as the denial of Keathley’s motion for reconsideration. The court found no abuse of discretion in the determination that Keathley was judicially estopped from pursuing his personal injury lawsuit due to his failure to disclose his personal injury claims in his ongoing chapter 13 case. Judge Haynes concurred in the judgment but expressed disagreement with Fifth Circuit precedent, suggesting that in such cases the district court should defer to the bankruptcy court’s evaluation.
- Procedural context:
- Thomas Keathley filed a personal injury lawsuit against Buddy Ayers Construction, Inc. (BAC) in December 2021, but failed to disclose the cause of action in his ongoing chapter 13 bankruptcy case, despite filing multiple amended bankruptcy plans after initiating the lawsuit. BAC moved for summary judgment on grounds of judicial estoppel. After the district court granted summary judgment in favor of BAC, Keathley filed a Rule 59(e) motion for reconsideration, which the district court denied. Keathley appealed both the summary judgment decision and the denial of his motion for reconsideration.
- Facts:
- Thomas Keathley filed a chapter 13 bankruptcy petition in December 2019. In August 2021, Keathley was involved in a motor vehicle collision with David Fowler, a truck driver employed by BAC. Keathley retained a personal injury attorney the day after the accident and filed suit against BAC in December 2021. Over the next several months, in the bankruptcy case, Keathley filed three modified chapter 13 plans but never disclosed his pending personal injury lawsuit against BAC. Only after BAC moved for summary judgment on grounds of judicial estoppel in March 2023 did Keathley file an amended schedule with the bankruptcy court disclosing the lawsuit. The district court granted summary judgment, finding that Keathley’s failure to disclose his claim warranted judicial estoppel under Fifth Circuit precedent.
- Judge(s):
- Higginbotham, Stewart, and Haynes
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary. Please Sign In using your ABI Member credentials. Not a Member yet? Join ABI now - it is absolutely worth it!
