Debtors filing bankruptcy petitions are typically broke and unable to afford counsel. Unlike a defendant in criminal proceedings, debtors in civil proceedings have no constitutional right to counsel. The obvious reason behind this is that a criminal defendant is facing the loss of liberty, while a debtor is merely facing monetary losses. Despite the disparity in punishment, the subtleties and complexities in bankruptcy law and proceedings may still create an unfair disadvantage for debtors that are forced to proceed pro se. One alternative to either proceeding pro se or retaining full-representation is for a debtor to hire counsel for a limited amount of services. When an attorney limits the services they provide to a debtor, the attorney is “unbundling” legal services. This memo will begin with an introduction to the concept of "unbundling" legal services, and will then discuss the ethical and legal implications for a bankruptcy attorney who engages in unbundling. And finally, after discussing the theoretical perspectives of unbundling, the memo will turn to a practical application of unbundling through the attorney Tom Hale, within the scope of Hale v. U.S. Trustee, 509 F.3d 1139 (9th Cir. 2007).
> View Full PDF
Heather Navo, J.D. Candidate 2010 No. 27, Vol. 1 (2009)