349 filings to study (chapter 7 individual - california)

[bornfree2]

Using courtlistener revap feature, you are able to search for public bankruptcy cases.

It is user friendly compared to PACER and most time provides the submitted petitions.
This is a gold mine of help for those filing pro se

Example: To find chapter 7 individual petitions in california (all 4 courts), i entered:

- limited jurisdiction to california bk courts
- "Chapter 7 Voluntary Petition Individual" in document description
- checked "only show results with PDFS"
- sorted by 'new cases first"

https://www.courtlistener.com/?q=&ty...%20canb%20casb

This returns 349 filings in their system.

tip 1- You can further search within these results by using the search form at the top. For example, i can narrow down to property of interest ('macbook') or exemption statues etc.

tip 2- you can use the search fields to find particular judges and trustees.

tip 3- you change the jurisdiction to your state court if you dont want california

tip 4- need an attorney and want to know their fees? click on the 'text' tab next to the pdf, and then do a free text search (control F) on browser for 'attorney'. The contact info and their cost will show up

edit: As JustBroke points out, be diligent in seeking out counsel. Personally, studying these filings makes me more educated so i can discuss my nuisances with an attorney.

[justbroke]

Reviewing other cases is okay, but fees are usually presumptive in most districts. That means that fees are fixed to a certain amount and controlled by the bankruptcy court of jurisdiction. The only things that change are case complexity and an "a la carte" menu of ancillary services where the attorney can charge more. This is especially important for Chapter 13s as the services and pricing can vary based on case complexity and the cost of those extra services.

For a Chapter 7 Pro Se I usually recommend obtaining a guidebook over looking at other cases. Each case is different. This is especially important when it comes to exemptions and local rules. It's likely better for the Chapter 7 Pro Se to seek out the Pro Bono/Pro Se clinic which is fee and is sponsored by the bankruptcy court.

Personally, I would not base my exemptions on anything gathered from another petition. Not even to figure out which exemption to use! This is especially true for California where they have two exemption schemes. For California, it will matter which a debtor chooses, because a debtor can't just swap them. In other states, one could choose the Federal exemptions or the State-specific exemptions, but not both.

Most of my personal research was on motion practice and appeals, not on what someone else used on a Schedule in the petition. I hardly ever looked at any petition. My research was on motions, objections, oppositions, contested matters (and adversaries), along with Chapter 13 plans.

[bornfree2]

I agree with what you wrote regarding being careful not to copy-pasta filings. But it has been a great way for me to get educated on how they are done so I can speak with some knowledge with an attorney.

Most of my personal research was on motion practice and appeals, not on what someone else used on a Schedule in the petition. I hardly ever looked at any petition. My research was on motions, objections, oppositions, contested matters (and adversaries), along with Chapter 13 plans.

Where is this treasure trove of info? On PACER? Or I guess if they have for-pay databases to research.

[justbroke]

I used a lot of PACER and spent hundreds of dollars in PACER. I have also used some other paid services such as Westlaw. I have gone to the law library where the terminals are free. I have also done some research using the free PACER terminals in the Clerk's office and in the Pro Bono room. (The Clerk's office is closed due to COVID so I don't know if there are any free terminals available.)

Yes, I spent some $$$ on research.

[bornfree2]

According to the free.law people (creators of court listener) PACER rakes in $100 million a year in fees. The reason that project was established was to 'liberate' these public domain filings so the common man can have access. One of the founder wrote a great article on this https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...-against-pacer

https://free.law/2016/11/14/how-much-money-does-pacer-make/

[justbroke]

If you looked further, you'll see that 75% of all PACER users pay no fee at all. Most of the PACER fees come from attorneys. Remember that PACER is also the system for the U.S. District court which has more cases than the Bankruptcy Court. The money pays for the system and for the "free" access for people who generate less than $30 worth of billing per quarter. .

There is a current lawsuit regarding the fees since PACER is making a boatload of money. The question is only whether it is making a profit over the costs to maintain the system.

I have no problem or issue with PACER and appreciate the easy access.

[bornfree2]

Only in government can a website database service be said to be loosing money when it brings in over $100 million a year. Reminds me of the initial obamacare website:

"In August 2014, the Office of Inspector General released a report finding that the cost of the HealthCare.gov website had reached $1.7 billion."

PACER can easily be run for far,far cheaper and the free.law project demonstrates working proof of a superior system with the same underlying data.

[justbroke]

Law Project couldn't. PACER is more than just access. It is actually the CM/ECF system which is the entire Case Management and Electronic Case File for the entire U.S. District Court (Trial, Appellate and Bankruptcy). There's much more in there than simple access to the docket. It has templating, workflow, case tickling, feeds to EBN and other systems. So it's a little more complex than just holding and showing documents.

I do agree, though that on the public side it should be completely free. I suppose they were worried that attorneys and other business users would abuse it, so that's why that set the fee to be prohibitive for using it for research.

I actually design similar systems. They aren't that cheap.