In Clark v. Perino 235 Ga. App. 444 (509 S.E.2d 707) (1998) ruled that judicial estoppel did not bar a claim originally omitted from a pro se bankruptcy petition but later added. In 1991, Clark sued Perino and IBM as a result of an accident. In 1994, with that action still pending, Clark filed a Chapter 7 bankruptcy suit without identifying claims against Perino and IBM as potential assets. Clark was granted a bankruptcy discharge. After opposing counsel pointed out that the claim was omitted from the bankruptcy action, Clark successfully moved the bankruptcy court to reopen her bankruptcy to allow Clark to file amended schedules listing her claims. The Court held that because Clark successfully amended her claim once the mistake was noticed, she gained no unfair advantage in bankruptcy court. Id. at 445-446 (1).