Barnes v. Lolling, 2017 IL App (3d) 150157

Barnes filed Chapter 13 bankruptcy in 2008, entered a five-year repayment plan, and received a discharge in April 2013 after paying about $30,000; unsecured debts of ~$92,165 were discharged.
On October 7, 2011 (while the Chapter 13 case was pending), Barnes was injured in an automobile accident involving defendant Lolling (employed by United Contractors).
Barnes retained a personal-injury lawyer shortly after the accident; counsel notified the insurer that damages could exceed $50,000.
Barnes did not disclose the accident or potential claim to the bankruptcy trustee, did not amend schedules, and did not notify her bankruptcy attorney.
After discharge and case closure, Barnes filed a personal-injury suit on October 7, 2013. Defendants moved for summary judgment asserting (1) lack of standing because the claim accrued during bankruptcy and remained estate property, and (2) judicial estoppel because Barnes failed to disclose the claim.
The trial court granted summary judgment on judicial estoppel; the appellate court affirmed on two independent bases: (A) Barnes lacked standing to pursue the claim individually because it accrued during the bankruptcy and was never scheduled/abandoned, and (B) judicial estoppel bars the claim given undisclosed, inconsistent positions and evidence suggesting deliberate concealment.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Did Barnes have standing to pursue the personal-injury claim after bankruptcy closed?	Barnes proceeded in her own name after discharge; impliedly contends she could sue individually.	The claim accrued while the Chapter 13 case was pending and was property of the estate that was never disclosed or abandoned, so Barnes lacks post‑closure individual standing.	Held: No standing — claim accrued during the bankruptcy, was not scheduled or abandoned, so remains estate property; Barnes must reopen bankruptcy or obtain abandonment.
Is Barnes’s suit barred by judicial estoppel for failing to disclose the claim in bankruptcy?	Barnes says nondisclosure was inadvertent; she lacked knowledge of duty to disclose and did not intend to deceive.	Defendants contend Barnes took inconsistent positions (nondisclosure then suing), received the bankruptcy benefit, and deliberately concealed the claim.	Held: Judicial estoppel applies — prerequisites met and discretion to impose estoppel was properly exercised given facts indicating deliberate concealment.

Seymour v. Collins, 2015 IL 118432 (Ill. 2015) (judicial estoppel framework and discretionary application)
In re Jones, 657 F.3d 921 (9th Cir. 2011) (Chapter 13 estate includes claims acquired after petition and before case closure)
In re Waldron, 536 F.3d 1239 (11th Cir. 2008) (debtor’s duty to schedule postpetition assets; undisclosed assets remain estate property)
Cable v. Ivy Tech State College, 200 F.3d 467 (7th Cir. 1999) (debtor-in-possession authority under reorganization chapters and treatment of postpetition claims)
Smith v. Rockett, 522 F.3d 1080 (10th Cir. 2008) (debtor lacks standing to pursue estate claims for personal benefit while case is open)