Keathley v. Buddy Ayers Construction, Inc. · ¶43

New Hampshire certainly does not ordain that judicial estoppel should apply in cases like Keathley’s, in which his inconsistency was between, on the one hand, representations to creditors in a bankruptcy court, and, on the other hand, representations in a separate tort suit against a stranger to those bankruptcy proceedings. At a minimum, it is difficult to see how application of this doctrine in cases such as this one serves any equitable purpose, or how an interest in “the integrity of the judicial process” could justify it. Id., at 749 (internal quotation marks omitted).

slip opinion
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.