Timothy Dean Strong - Page 6

                                        - 6 -                                         
               In the motions for partial summary judgment, petitioners               
          argue that the doctrine of judicial estoppel does not bar Strong            
          or SCC from arguing that Strong possessed the claimed                       
          accumulation of cash.  Petitioners maintain that they should not            
          be bound by Strong’s failure to report this cash in the 1990                
          bankruptcy proceeding, alleging that Strong’s bankruptcy attorney           
          specifically advised him not to list the accumulated cash as an             
          asset in the bankruptcy petition.  Petitioners indicate that                
          Strong, and, possibly, the bankruptcy attorney were confused                
          about whether the $165,000 was Strong’s or SCC’s.  Strong states            
          that his resulting failure to list the cash in the bankruptcy               
          proceeding was thus unintentional, or a mistake.  Petitioners               
          also point out that the bankruptcy attorney was subsequently                
          suspended from practice and has since retired.                              
               Respondent filed an objection to petitioners’ motions.                 
          Respondent maintains that, as a matter of law, the doctrine of              
          judicial estoppel precludes petitioners’ “cash hoard” argument              
          here, whether or not Strong’s failure to report the cash in the             
          bankruptcy proceeding was the result of bad advice from his                 
          bankruptcy attorney.  Respondent alternatively argues that, even            
          if petitioners are correct that erroneous legal advice is a                 
          defense to judicial estoppel, there remain unresolved material              
          issues of fact about that legal advice.  Respondent offers the              
          affidavit of Strong’s bankruptcy attorney in which the attorney             

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011