Bankruptcy Judicial Estoppel.

Byline: Derek Hawkins

7th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: CSI Wordlwide, LLC, v. Trumpf Inc.,

Case No.: 19-2189

Officials: EASTERBROOK, ROVNER, and SCUDDER, Circuit Judges.

Focus: Bankruptcy Judicial Estoppel

TRUMPF Inc., the U.S. subsidiary of an international business, makes specialty tools such as precision laser cutters. Trade shows are among its selling venues, and it hired Lynch Exhibits to handle its appearance at 2017 FABTECH show in Chicago. Lynch subcontracted with CSI Worldwide to provide some of the necessary services.

CSI contends that it told TRUMPF that it was unsure of Lynch's reliability and would do the work only if TRUMPF paid it directly or guaranteed Lynch's payment. According to CSI, TRUMPF assented though it did not sign any undertaking to that effect. CSI did the work and billed Lynch, which did not pay. CSI filed an involuntary bankruptcy petition against Lynch, which soon filed a voluntary bankruptcy petition. CSI claimed approximately $530,000 as a creditor. It also filed this suit against TRUMPF under the diversity jurisdiction, seeking $530,000 on theories including unjust enrichment and promissory estoppel. The district court dismissed the suit on the pleadings, ruling that, by making a claim in Lynch's bankruptcy, CSI necessarily represented that Lynch is the sole debtor. The district court called its approach judicial estoppel.

This is not a novel problem, and the Bankruptcy Code itself provides the answer. Filing a claim in bankruptcy does not foreclose claims against non-bankrupt...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT