There were one to three standing Chapter 13 trustees in each of the seven sample districts. Second only to the bankruptcy judges in their potential influence over case administration,93 the
standing trustees are closely involved in almost every aspect of Chapter 13 case administration. The trustee presides over the meetings of creditors, reviews all plans and when appropriate objects to confirmation, seeks dismissal of cases when the debtor fails to make required plan
Lawyer and Client Meet: Observations of Interviewing and Counseling Behavior in the Consumer Bankruptcy Law Office, 35 BUFF. L. REV. 177, 204 (1986) (stating the local bankruptcy judge carefully assessed feasibility of proposed Chapter 13 plans).
92The combination of lower discharge rate and higher pre- confirmation dismissal rate reported in Table 20 for the Western District of Tennessee may have been a function of the very high numbers of serial filers there. See supra note 30 and accompanying text and Figure 1.
93See also Braucher, Lawyers and Consumer Bankruptcy, supra note 1, at 556 (concluding that “Chapter 13 standing trustees have great potential influence” on local legal culture).
payments, recommends to the court the standard “no-look” fee for debtors’ attorneys, and collects and disburses payments to creditors. Trustees in some districts have implemented debtor education programs for Chapter 13 debtors,94 and some may be
zealous advocates for the use of Chapter 13 instead of Chapter 7 by debtors in their districts.95
We found no significant differences in case outcomes based on the identity of the standing Chapter 13 trustee. It was difficult to disentangle the impact of judges from the impact of trustees on case outcomes, because (except in one district96 in which there were no significant
differences in case outcomes among judges) only one trustee administered essentially all cases before a given judge.97 Nonetheless, seven of the
fourteen standing trustees in the study handled almost all of the cases assigned to two or more judges. In the District of Maryland, Middle District of Tennessee, Western District of Tennessee, Northern District of Georgia and Southern District of Georgia, at least one of the standing trustees was assigned to handle the cases before two or more judges. In these five districts, then, we were able to compare the case outcomes for each of the trustees to determine whether there were any significant differences in case outcomes based on the identity of the trustee. Looking at only these cases, we found no significant differences in case outcomes based on the identity of the trustee.98 Although limited in
94See Braucher, An Empirical Study of Debtor Education, supra note 1.
95See Braucher, Lawyers and Consumer Bankruptcy, supra note 1, at 556-559.
96In the Western District of Tennessee, one judge’s cases were split between two standing trustees.
97See supra note 86.
98Specifically, in the District of Maryland, there were no significant differences in discharge rates for the cases that Chapter 13 Trustee Cosby administered before either of two judges. The same
their reliability due to the small sample of trustees, these findings tend to support the conclusion that judges typically exert more influence over case outcomes than trustees and that the broader culture, or the interaction or confluence of attitudes and practices of the relevant actors, generally exerted more influence on case outcomes than the actions of individual trustees.
VII.THE DEBTORS’ ATTORNEYS
The debtor’s attorney also plays a pivotal role in the Chapter 13 system. The attorney advises the debtor regarding the need to file for bankruptcy relief and, if bankruptcy is advised, whether to file under Chapter 7 or Chapter 13. In Chapter 13 cases, the attorney’s duties include working with the debtor to devise a feasible and otherwise confirmable plan.
The court case records contain very limited information regarding debtors’ attorneys. We were able to collect data on whether the debtor was represented by an attorney, and if so, the name of the attorney or firm. In addition, as discussed in Part V above, we also surveyed the Chapter 13 trustees in each district regarding the amount of the standard fee for Chapter 13 cases in their districts in 1994 and regarding any requirements for payment of attorney fees under the plan as opposed to up front.
was true for Trustee Lackey, who administered cases before the other two judges. In the Middle District of Tennessee, there was no significant difference in the discharge rates between the different judges whose cases were administered by the one standing Chapter 13 trustee. In the Northern District of Georgia, the discharge rates did not significantly differ as between any of the three judges whose cases were assigned to Trustee Bone. Nor did any significant differences occur in the distribution of discharge rates for Trustee Brown in the cases before the two judges whose cases she served. Finally, there were no significant differences in discharge rates in the Western District of Tennessee for trustee (now Judge) Emerson in cases before two judges and similarly no differences for Trustee Stevenson in the cases that he handled before either of two judges.
This Part reports on the numbers of debtors who filed for Chapter 13 pro se, and compares case outcomes and bankruptcy refiling rates based on whether the debtor was represented by an attorney. It then considers the relation between case outcome and whether the debtor was represented by a “low-volume” or “high-volume” debtor law practice.