Eugene K. Biesek v. Soo Line Railroad Company and Canadian Pacific Railway

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that the “threshold issue” was whether the plaintiff was “the real party in interest”
• noting that a discharge is a personal financial benefit to the debtor
• describing the debtor as “an interloper, trying to prosecute a claim that belongs to his estate in bankruptcy”
• refusing to apply the equitable doctrine of judicial estoppel against creditors who had been victimized by debtor’s nondisclosure during previous bankruptcy proceeding
• refusing to apply judicial estoppel, where doing so would adversely affect creditors
• if trustee abandons legal claim, debtor may \prosecute[ ] the suit in his own name\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).