When being sued, corporate and individual defendants should always confirm that the plaintiff has not been previously discharged in bankruptcy and failed to disclose the claim in the proceeding as an asset of the bankruptcy estate. In Guay v. Burack, 677 F.3d 10 (1st Cir. 2012), the plaintiff brought numerous claims against various governmental entities, governmental officials and a police officer. The plaintiff had previously obtained a bankruptcy discharge from his debts but had failed to disclose in that bankruptcy proceeding the fact that he possessed the claim which he currently pursued against the defendants. The Court sustained a summary judgment motion brought by the defendants on the basis that the plaintiff had previously failed to amend his bankruptcy schedules prior to obtaining the debt discharge from the bankruptcy court. The appellate court upheld the trial court’s grant of summary judgment based upon judicial estoppel. The Court, consistent with other courts, held that the failure to identify a claim such as a potential lawsuit as an asset in a previous bankruptcy proceeding was a prior inconsistent position serving as the basis for the application of judicial estoppel and barred the plaintiff from pursuing the claim in a later proceeding. Corporate defendants should always determine as part of any proceeding whether the corporate or individual plaintiff had previously sought bankruptcy protection and whether the claim being asserted was disclosed in that proceeding.