How does the “indicative rulings” process work when a settlement occurs while a bankruptcy dispute is pending on appeal before a U.S. circuit court of appeals? In such circumstance:
In re Caesars Entertainment is one of the major-and-successful bankruptcy cases in the history of these United States.
The Caesars bankruptcy was filed on January 15, 2015, in the Northern Illinois Bankruptcy Court with $18 billion of debt. It achieved a confirmed plan two years later (on January 17, 2017). The bankruptcy case finally closed within the last six months (on December 3, 2025), and its last docket entry [No. 9968] is dated January 12, 2026.
Mediation Controversy—Background
Here is an opinion illustrating how the “indicative rulings” process in Fed.R.Bankr.P. 8008 can work:
Under § 547(b) of the Bankruptcy Code (emphasis added):
- “the trustee may, based on reasonable due diligence in the circumstances of the case and taking into account a party’s known or reasonably knowable affirmative defenses under subsection (c), avoid [a preferential transfer.”
Question: What amount of detail is required in a preference complaint to satisfy the above-quoted “reasonable due diligence” requirement?
Here’s a judicial estoppel hypothetical:
- debtor files Subchapter V bankruptcy and achieves a confirmed plan;
- in the bankruptcy debtor fails to disclose a pre-petition lawsuit claim;
- after plan confirmation, debtor files suit on the pre-petition lawsuit claim; and
- defendant seeks dismissal of the lawsuit, with prejudice, on grounds of judicial estoppel—i.e., for debtor/plaintiff’s failure to disclose the claim in bankruptcy.
Question: Who should be the ultimate beneficiary of a lawsuit claim that debtor fails to disclose:
A Petition for Writ of Certiorari has been granted by the U.S. Supreme Court in Keathley v. Buddy Ayers Construction, Inc., Case No. 25-6, on a ruling from the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.[Fn. 1]
The Question Presented in Kethley v. Buddy Ayers is this:
11 U.S.C. § 365(c)(2) says (emphasis added):