Bertrand v. Handley

11 Citing cases

  1. Chandler v. Samford University

    35 F. Supp. 2d 861 (N.D. Ala. 1999)   Cited 49 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding Chapter 13 debtor who filed EEOC employment discrimination charge during pendency of her Chapter 13 case had affirmative duty to amend her schedules to reflect that asset

    Courts of various jurisdictions have held that a debtor's assertion of legal claims not disclosed in earlier bankruptcy proceedings constitutes an assumption of inconsistent positions. Tippins, 221 B.R. at 26-27; Bertrand v. Handley, 646 So.2d 16, 19 (Ala. 1994); Luna v. Dominion Bank of Middle Tennessee, Inc., 631 So.2d 917, 918 (Ala. 1993); Underwood v. First Franklin Financial Corp., 710 So.2d 424, 426 (Ala.Civ.App. 1997), reh'g denied, cert. denied (1998); see Payless Wholesale Distributors, Inc. v. Alberto Culver, 989 F.2d 570, 571 (1st Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 931, 114 S.Ct. 344, 126 L.Ed.2d 309 (1993); Oneida, 848 F.2d at 419; Brassfield, 953 F. Supp. at 1432-33. This holding stems from the requirement that a debtor seeking the shelter provided by federal bankruptcy laws disclose all legal or equitable property interests to a bankruptcy court.

  2. Middleton v. Caterpillar

    979 So. 2d 53 (Ala. 2007)   Cited 47 times
    Holding that Alabama procedural rules apply in all civil actions maintained in Alabama state courts

    This Court also upheld a summary judgment for a noncreditor-defendant in Bertrand v. Handley, 646 So.2d 16 (Ala. 1994). In Bertrand a tenant sued, among others, her landlord for damages arising out of injuries sustained when she fell down an allegedly defective ramp.

  3. Jinright v. Paulk

    758 So. 2d 553 (Ala. 2000)   Cited 32 times
    Expressing concern about applying the doctrine of judicial estoppel in a manner that punishes innocent creditors of the debtor

    In Luna v. Dominion Bank of Middle Tennessee, Inc., 631 So.2d 917, 918 (Ala. 1993), we noted that "[a] debtor in [a bankruptcy proceeding] must disclose any litigation likely to arise in a nonbankruptcy [context]." In Bertrand v. Handley, 646 So.2d 16, 18 (Ala. 1994), we stated that in Luna we had held that the doctrine of judicial estoppel applies to estop a debtor from suing on a claim where the debtor "has failed to disclose the claim in an earlier bankruptcy proceeding." We applied that holding in Bertrand.

  4. Battle v. Alpha Chemical Paper Co.

    770 So. 2d 626 (Ala. Civ. App. 2000)   Cited 15 times
    In Battle v. Alpha Chemical Paper Co., 770 So.2d 626 (Ala.Civ.App. 2000), the defendant challenged the Chapter 7 bankruptcy debtor's right to maintain her cause of action against the defendant after filing a petition for bankruptcy. This court addressed whether the bankruptcy trustee, rather than the debtor, was the real party in interest, with the exclusive right to maintain a civil action against the defendant.

    In the circuit court, Alpha moved for a summary judgment, contending (1) that the doctrine of judicial estoppel applied to bar Battle's claim against it, and (2) that Battle lacked "standing" to assert her claim. In support, Alpha cited the cases of Luna v. Dominion Bank of Middle Tennessee, Inc., 631 So.2d 197 (Ala. 1993), and Bertrand v. Handley, 646 So.2d 16 (Ala. 1994), and attached pertinent documents it had obtained from the bankruptcy court. Battle filed a response in opposition. After a hearing, the circuit court entered a judgment in favor of Alpha on the bases of judicial estoppel and lack of "standing," and denied Battle's subsequent postjudgment motion.

  5. Jones v. Lanthrip

    765 So. 2d 682 (Ala. Civ. App. 2000)   Cited 6 times
    Reversing summary judgment entered against Chapter 13 debtor-plaintiff because of defendants' failure to demonstrate prejudice

    In Luna v. Dominion Bank of Middle Tennessee, Inc., 631 So.2d 917, 918 (Ala. 1993), we noted that `[a] debtor in [a bankruptcy proceeding] must disclose any litigation likely to arise in a nonbankruptcy [context].' In Bertrand v. Handley, 646 So.2d 16, 18 (Ala. 1994), we stated that in Luna we had `held that the doctrine of judicial estoppel applies to estop a debtor from suing on a claim where the debtor has failed to disclose the claim in an earlier bankruptcy proceeding.' We applied that holding in Bertrand.

  6. Saunders v. Neurological, P.A

    770 So. 2d 612 (Ala. Civ. App. 1999)   Cited 1 times

    "Luna, 631 So.2d at 918. See also Bertrand v. Handley, 646 So.2d 16 (Ala. 1994). In this case, it is undisputed that Mrs. Saunders met with two attorneys to discuss whether Dr. Hash's surgery might have caused the disabilities Mr. Saunders subsequently experienced.

  7. In re Tippins

    221 B.R. 11 (Bankr. N.D. Ala. 1998)   Cited 43 times
    Holding in a Chapter 13 case that a reservation of all causes of action does not comport with due process because such reservation deprives the creditors of their right to rely on the finality of the confirmation order

    Courts in Alabama have repeatedly held that a plaintiff is judicially estopped from bringing a cause of action in state court that was not timely listed in his bankruptcy proceedings as at least a contingent asset. Bertrand v. Handley, 646 So.2d 16, 18 (Ala. 1994); Luna v. Dominion Bank of MiddleTennessee, Inc., 631 So.2d 917 (Ala. 1993). In each of these cases, the court granted a noncreditor defendant a summary judgment based upon the debtor-plaintiff's previous failure to list the cause of action as an asset in the bankruptcy schedules.

  8. Martin v. Cash Express, Inc.

    60 So. 3d 236 (Ala. 2010)   Cited 21 times
    Holding that res judicata applies when a "final judgment on the merits" was entered in a prior action by a court of competent jurisdiction in a case involving the same cause of action between substantially identical parties

    " Luna, 631 [So.2d] at 919. "See also, Bertrand v. Handley, 646 So.2d 16 (Ala. 1994) (tenant's failure to disclose her default judgment against landlord as an asset in bankruptcy estopped her from asserting her claim against the landlord once she was discharged from bankruptcy.). "Although both Luna and Bertrand involved Chapter 7 bankruptcies, the same rule applies to Chapter 13 bankruptcies.

  9. Terminix Intern. Co. v. Jackson

    723 So. 2d 555 (Ala. 1998)   Cited 5 times
    Concluding that the language of the arbitration clause did not encompass actions related to a termite letter issued before the document containing the arbitration clause was effective

    Selma Foundry Supply Co. v. Peoples Bank Trust Co., 698 So.2d 844, 846 (Ala. 1992), quoting Oneida Motor Freight, Inc. v. United Jersey Bank, 848 F.2d 414, 419 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 967, 109 S.Ct. 495, 102 L.Ed.2d 532 (1988). See also Bertrand v. Handley, 646 So.2d 16 (Ala. 1994); Luna v. Dominion bank of Middle Tennessee, Inc., 631 So.2d 917 (Ala. 1993); Bracy v. Scott, 589 So.2d 145 (Ala. 1991); Russell v. Russell, 404 So.2d 662 (Ala. 1981). Because Terminix took the position that only the contract claim was subject to arbitration, and because this Court relied principally upon that position to overturn the circuit court's finding of a waiver, Terminix is judicially estopped from taking the position that all of the claims in the Jacksons' complaint are subject to arbitration.

  10. Crider v. Misty Acres, Inc.

    893 So. 2d 1165 (Ala. Civ. App. 2004)   Cited 2 times

    Courts in Alabama have held that a plaintiff is judicially estopped from bringing a cause of action in state court that was not timely listed in his bankruptcy proceedings as at least a contingent asset. Bertrand v. Handley, 646 So.2d 16 (Ala. 1994); Luna v. Dominion Bank of Middle Tennessee, Inc., 631 So.2d 917 (Ala. 1993). In Bertrand and Luna, the supreme court held that a noncreditor defendant was entitled to a summary judgment based upon the debtor-plaintiff's previous failure to list the cause of action as an asset in the bankruptcy schedules.