Conger v. Clark — Idaho Supreme Court affirms dismissal because bankruptcy estate owns purchase option

Case
Jeff Conger v. Jay P. Clark
Court
Supreme Court of the State of Idaho
Judge
Meyer, Justice
Date Decided
September 4, 2026
Docket No.
52800
Topics
Bankruptcy; Standing; Real estate options; Lease agreements
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Jeff Conger entered a residential lease agreement with Jay P. Clark that included an $8,000 option to buy Clark’s Mountain Home home by satisfying Clark’s Wells Fargo mortgage. About 18 months later, Conger filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy. Although he listed Clark as a creditor and reported a monthly rent expense, Conger denied having any legal or equitable interest in real property, security deposits, future interests, executory contracts, or unexpired leases.

After receiving a Chapter 7 discharge, Conger tried in 2022 to exercise the purchase option. Clark refused, and Conger sued for specific performance and declaratory relief. The district court ultimately dismissed Conger’s claims, concluding that judicial estoppel applied and, alternatively, that Conger lacked standing because the undisclosed option remained property of the bankruptcy estate.

The Court’s Holding

The Idaho Supreme Court affirmed on standing grounds and did not reach judicial estoppel. Conger’s contractual option to purchase was a legal or equitable interest that became property of his bankruptcy estate when he filed his Chapter 7 petition.

Conger did not adequately schedule either the lease agreement or the purchase option. His references to renting, and to Clark as an unsecured creditor, did not disclose those interests; indeed, his schedules affirmatively denied interests that would have revealed them. Because unscheduled estate property is not technically abandoned when a Chapter 7 case closes, the option remained estate property under 11 U.S.C. § 554(d). Only the trustee could enforce it, so Conger lacked standing. The Court awarded Clark costs, but no attorney fees.

Key Takeaways

  • A prepetition option to buy real property becomes property of a Chapter 7 bankruptcy estate.
  • Listing rent expense and naming a counterparty as a creditor does not adequately schedule a lease-option agreement.
  • Closing a bankruptcy case does not return an undisclosed asset to the debtor; the trustee remains the proper party to pursue it.

Why It Matters

The decision underscores that debtors must disclose leasehold, contractual, and contingent property interests with specificity in bankruptcy schedules. An undisclosed option can remain estate property even after the case closes and the debtor receives a discharge.

For litigants seeking to enforce such an asset, the proper remedy may be to reopen the bankruptcy case and seek trustee involvement, ratification, joinder, or substitution—not to proceed individually as the real party in interest.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top