Thomas Keathley, Petitioner v. Buddy Ayers Construction, Incorporated

Thomas Keathley filed a personal injury suit after a car crash but did not list that claim during his bankruptcy case. The Supreme Court is reviewing whether judicial estoppel (a rule that can block inconsistent positions in court) can shut down his lawsuit based only on a possible motive to hide it, without proof of bad faith.

The Court heard argument on March 24, 2026. The central fight is whether a plaintiff's possible motive for nondisclosure is enough to bar a later civil claim, or whether courts must find evidence that the plaintiff actually acted in bad faith.

The case could affect people in bankruptcy who forget or fail to disclose lawsuits, and the businesses they sue. For example, it could decide whether an injury claim is thrown out automatically because nondisclosure might have helped the debtor, or only when there is evidence of intentional deceit.

The Court is deciding whether Keathley's injury claim can be barred because he did not disclose it in bankruptcy filings. The issue is whether possible motive alone is enough, or whether bad faith must be shown.

It could shape how strictly courts treat bankruptcy nondisclosure when someone later tries to pursue a civil claim. That affects both debtors with lawsuits and defendants seeking to get those claims dismissed.

The Court has already heard oral argument. The next major step is a written opinion, likely by late June or early July unless the schedule changes.