Saddlebrook v. Krohne Fund

Summary

The court held that the District Court acted within its discretion in allowing Krohne Fund to assert judicial estoppel after the scheduling-order deadline. It nevertheless reversed summary judgment because neither the malicious-prosecution claim nor the abuse-of-process claim was barred by judicial estoppel: the malicious-prosecution claim had not accrued until after it was transferred from the debtor, and the bankruptcy trustee controlled and pursued the abuse-of-process claim. The case was remanded for further proceedings.