POHL v. US BANK, 14-cv-02292-PAB-MJW. (2016)
Court: District Court, D. Colorado
Number: infdco20160309f29
Visitors: 10
Filed: Mar. 08, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 08, 2016
Summary: ORDER PHILIP A. BRIMMER , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on United States Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe's Report and Recommendation on Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Docket No. 90) and Defendant U.S. Bank's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket No. 108) [Docket No. 147] (the "Recommendation"). In the Recommendation, the magistrate judge cited Eastman v. Union Pac. R. R. Co., 493 F.3d 1151 , 1159 (10th Cir. 2007), in considering whether plain
Summary: ORDER PHILIP A. BRIMMER , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on United States Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe's Report and Recommendation on Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Docket No. 90) and Defendant U.S. Bank's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket No. 108) [Docket No. 147] (the "Recommendation"). In the Recommendation, the magistrate judge cited Eastman v. Union Pac. R. R. Co., 493 F.3d 1151 , 1159 (10th Cir. 2007), in considering whether plaint..
More
ORDER
PHILIP A. BRIMMER, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on United States Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe's Report and Recommendation on Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Docket No. 90) and Defendant U.S. Bank's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket No. 108) [Docket No. 147] (the "Recommendation"). In the Recommendation, the magistrate judge cited Eastman v. Union Pac. R. R. Co., 493 F.3d 1151, 1159 (10th Cir. 2007), in considering whether plaintiffs have standing to pursue certain claims that they did not disclose to the bankruptcy court when they filed a petition under Chapter 7. See Docket No. 147 at 5, 7. In Eastman, the Tenth Circuit held that a district court properly applied judicial estoppel to bar plaintiff from pursuing claims that he did not disclose to the bankruptcy court. Eastman, 493 F.3d at 1153, 1158. Although the magistrate judge cited Eastman, it does not appear that the issue of judicial estoppel has been briefed by the parties. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that, on or before March 15, 2016, plaintiffs and defendants shall each submit supplemental briefs addressing whether plaintiffs should be judicially estopped from asserting any claims as a result of their failure to disclose those claims to the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Colorado. The supplemental briefs shall not exceed five (5) pages in length and no response shall be permitted.
Source: Leagle
