Judicial Estoppel has been argued countless times within the State and Federal Court within Nevada. However, the standard has never been "standardized". In a 2-1 decision, the 9th Circuit panel vacated the district court's summary judgment holding that prohibited a debtor from proceeding with her employment discrimination lawsuit which she did not list in her schedules.
Disagreeing with the
test articulated by other circuits, the panel held that the district court
applied the wrong legal standard in determining whether the plaintiff’s
bankruptcy omission was “mistaken” or “inadvertent.” The panel concluded
that when a plaintiff-debtor has reopened the bankruptcy proceedings and has
corrected the initial filing error, narrow interpretations of “mistake” and
inadvertence” do not apply. The panel stated that in these circumstances,
rather than the application of a presumption of deceit, judicial estoppel
requires an inquiry into whether the plaintiff’s bankruptcy filing was, in
fact, inadvertent or mistaken, as those terms are commonly understood.
The panel remanded the case for application of the correct legal
standard.
Ah Quin v. County of Kauai - 7-24-13 - 9th Cir.
No comments:
Post a Comment