Keathley v. Buddy Ayers | Docket

Keathley v. Buddy Ayers

The Fifth Circuit had previously affirmed dismissal of Thomas Keathley’s personal-injury lawsuit and denial of reconsideration based on an omission from his bankruptcy schedules. After the Supreme Court held that the Fifth Circuit had artificially narrowed its inquiry into whether the omission was inadvertent or mistaken, vacated the judgment, and remanded, the Fifth Circuit remanded the matter in its entirety to the district court.

Docket

Court

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Court level

appellate

Jurisdiction

Federal

Date filed

July 17, 2026

Parties

Thomas Keathley · appellantBuddy Ayers Construction, Incorporated · appellee

Judges

Higginbotham · majorityCarl E. Stewart · majority, authorHaynes · majority

Status

published

Disposition

REMANDED in its entirety to the district court in accordance with the judgment of the Supreme Court.

Opinion type

combined

Format

authored

Nature of suit

Private Civil Diversity

Source

View PDF

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

____________

No. 24-60025

____________

Thomas Keathley, Plaintiff—Appellant , versus Buddy Ayers Construction, Incorporated, Defendant—Appellee .

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi USDC No. 3:21-CV-261

Before Higginbotham, Stewart, and Haynes, Circuit Judges . Carl E. Stewart, Circuit Judge :

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

This court affirmed the district court’s dismissal of PlaintiffAppellant Thomas Keathley’s personal injury lawsuit as well as its denial of his motion for reconsideration. Keathley v. Buddy Ayers Constr., Inc. , No. 2460025, 2025 WL 673434, at *7 (March 3, 2025). On petition for writ of certiorari, the Supreme Court held that this court erred by 'artificially narrow[ing] its inquiry into whether Keathley’s bankruptcy-schedule omission was the result of inadvertence or mistake by assessing only whether Page 2he had knowledge of the underlying facts or a potential motive to conceal his personal-injury suit.” Keathley v. Buddy Ayers Constr., Inc. , 146 S.Ct. 1532, 1540 (2026). It then vacated and remanded for further proceedings consistent with its opinion. Id .

This matter is REMANDED in its entirety to the district court in accordance with the judgment of the Supreme Court. We express no view as to what proceedings the district court should conduct on remand or what decisions it should make. The mandate shall issue forthwith.