Aery v. Wallace Lincoln-Mercury, LLC
118 So. 3d 904
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2013Background
- Aery appeals a final summary judgment in favor of Maroone Lincoln Mercury.
- The grounds were: (1) lack of standing due to Chapter 13 bankruptcy, (2) judicial estoppel to bar lost wages, (3) failure to mitigate damages.
- Aery filed Chapter 13 while the case was pending; his Schedule B listed the suit as a contingent, unliquidated claim valued at about $249,000.
- The trial court held Aery could pursue the claim as a Chapter 7 debtor would not have standing; the court relied on Chapter 7 precedent.
- The court ultimately reversed, holding Chapter 13 debtors retain standing to sue on estate claims, and that factual disputes remained on causation and mitigation.
- The opinion discusses the factual posture, including Aery’s firing in 2004, subsequent employment attempts, and receipt of Social Security Disability Benefits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing of a Chapter 13 debtor to sue | Aery as Chapter 13 debtor retains standing to sue. | Estate ownership or trustee controls pre-petition claims; debtor lacks standing. | Chapter 13 debtors retain standing to sue on pre-petition claims for the estate. |
| Judicial estoppel to bar lost wages | Disability finding does not negate causal link between firing and damages; no conflicting position. | SSDI benefits create a conflicting position after the fact. | Judicial estoppel does not bar recovery of lost wages; issue of causation remains fact-intensive. |
| Mitigation of damages | Disability caused inability to work; mitigation should not defeat damages. | If disability is caused by firing, mitigation may reduce back/front pay. | Genuine issues of material fact about mitigation remain; summary judgment inappropriate. |
| Failure to state a cause of action under FWA | Objection to illegal conduct shown via reports to supervisor; prima facie case satisfied. | Defendant argues insufficient specificity of alleged illegal activity. | Prima facie case established; sufficient to proceed; factual causation disputed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Grau v. Provident Life & Accident Ins. Co., 899 So.2d 396 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (judicial estoppel purpose to preserve court integrity)
- Cable v. Ivy Tech State Coll., 200 F.3d 467 (7th Cir. 1999) (Chapter 13 debtor may sue on behalf of the estate)
- Smith v. Rockett, 522 F.3d 1080 (10th Cir. 2008) (Chapter 13 debtor standing to file complaint on estate)
- Crosby v. Monroe Cnty., 394 F.3d 1328 (11th Cir. 2004) (Chapter 13 debtor retains standing to pursue claims)
- Blumberg v. USAA Casualty Insurance Co., 790 So.2d 1061 (Fla. 2001) (illustrates misuse of inconsistent positions in related actions)
- Lathem v. Dep’t of Children & Youth Servs., 172 F.3d 786 (11th Cir. 1999) (exception to mitigation or front/back pay under certain causal links)