Keathley v. Buddy Ayers Construction, Inc. · ¶16
The District Court disagreed. Relying on Fifth Circuit precedent, the court explained that the omission of a claim on the bankruptcy schedules will be considered the result of inadvertence or mistake only if (1) the debtor did not know the facts underlying the claim, or (2) there was no potential motive to conceal the claim. 686 F. Supp. 3d 495, 497, 500–501 (ND Miss. 2023) (citing United States ex rel. Long v. GSDMIdea City, LLC, 798 F. 3d 265, 273 (CA5 2015); Love v. Tyson Foods, Inc., 677 F. 3d 258, 262 (CA5 2012)). Applying that rule, the District Court found that Keathley concededly knew of the facts underlying his personal-injury claims and had a hypothetical motive to conceal: Keathley might have had to pay interest on his debts had the Bankruptcy Court and creditors known of the personal-injury lawsuit. The District Court therefore held that Keathley’s omission was not…Read in context ›
slip opinion
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.