Robinson v. District of Columbia
10 F. Supp. 3d 181
D.D.C.2014Background
- Plaintiff Mark Robinson, African-American, sues the District of Columbia for Title VII discrimination and retaliation and DC Whistleblower retaliation.
- Actions underlying the suit occurred between November 29, 2010 and July 30, 2013; EEOC complaints filed in 2011 with right-to-sue letters in 2013.
- Plaintiff and spouse filed for bankruptcy on July 9, 2012; pending EEOC complaints not listed in Schedule B or Statement of Financial Affairs.
- Debtor discharged under Chapter 7 on May 21, 2013; case closed October 24, 2013; plaintiff later disclosed the suit to bankruptcy attorney.
- Bankruptcy trustee received notice of assets; no distributions to creditors were made; defendant moves to estop under Moses.
- Court analyzes whether nondisclosure bars this action via judicial estoppel and whether inadvertence or motive applies.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Do nondisclosures support judicial estoppel? | Robinson argues inadvertence and lack of motive. | District argues nondisclosure warrants estoppel. | Yes; estoppel applies and case dismissed. |
| Is there a meaningful connection between bankruptcy and this suit? | No meaningful connection alleged. | There is a meaningful connection; assets disclosure required. | Connection exists; estoppel applicable. |
| Was there knowledge and motive to conceal the claims? | Plaintiff asserts no knowledge or motive to conceal. | Plaintiff had knowledge and motive to conceal. | Knowledge and motive present; estoppel applied. |
Key Cases Cited
- Moses v. Howard University Hospital, 606 F.3d 789 (D.C. Cir. 2010) (three-factor test for judicial estoppel; connection and motives assessed)
- New Hampshire v. Maine, 532 U.S. 742 (U.S. 2001) (equitable considerations in applying judicial estoppel)
- In re Coastal Plains, Inc., 179 F.3d 197 (5th Cir. 1999) (duty to disclose assets in bankruptcy; impact on estoppel)
- Cannon-Stokes v. Potter, 453 F.3d 446 (7th Cir. 2006) (non-disclosure consequences despite trustee involvement)
- Jethroe v. Omnova Solutions, Inc., 412 F.3d 598 (5th Cir. 2005) (duty to disclose pending EEOC claims during bankruptcy)
- Payless Wholesale Distrib., Inc. v. Alberto Culver (P.R.) Inc., 989 F.2d 570 (1st Cir. 1993) (nondisclosure and estoppel in bankruptcy context)