Open Bankruptcy Project

Bankruptcy Adversary Proceeding Patterns — Empirical Dataset v0.1

Name: Bankruptcy Adversary Proceeding Patterns Dataset v0.1
Creator: Open Bankruptcy Project
Published: 2026-04-27
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

5,577 adversary proceedings analyzed. AP litigation in bankruptcy is overwhelmingly settlement-driven, with 20x variation in filing rates across districts and a clear post-2012 volume decline. Most academic literature on APs works from individual case studies; this is empirical pattern-recognition at scale.

Headline findings

57.7%

APs ending in "Dismissed or Settled Without Entry of Judgment" (3,217 of 5,577). The dominant AP outcome is procedural exit before merits determination — settlement, voluntary dismissal, or procedural deficiency. Substantive merits adjudication is the minority outcome.

~5%

APs reaching substantive merits ruling (173 bench trials + 78 summary judgments = 4.5% of all APs). The vast majority of AP litigation never produces a written opinion on the underlying legal merits.

20x

variation in AP filing rates across districts. Ohio Northern (ohnbk) files 18.97 APs per 100 main cases. New Jersey (njbk) files 0.86 per 100. The procedural same-statute system produces wildly different AP intensity by venue.

181 days

Median AP duration from filing to termination. AP litigation is faster than Ch.13 cases (1,728 day median) but slower than Ch.7 (104 days). Most APs resolve within 6 months.

The disposition distribution

Disposition	Count	Share of APs
Dismissed or Settled Without Entry of Judgment	3,217	57.7%
Judgment Entered by Default	917	16.4%
Judgment Entered on Consent	414	7.4%
Judgment Entered after Bench Trial	173	3.1%
Transfer to Another District	84	1.5%
Dismissed for Want of Prosecution	78	1.4%
Judgment Entered on Summary Judgment	78	1.4%
Other	67	1.2%
Judgment Entered (Other)	63	1.1%
Transferred to District Court for Jury Trial	46	0.8%

What this tells us about AP litigation

The 57.7% "dismissed or settled without judgment" rate is the most striking finding. Several implications:

AP filings function primarily as leverage for settlement, not as paths to substantive judicial decisions. Plaintiffs file APs to bring defendants to the table; once settlement happens, the AP gets dismissed or settled without judgment.
Default judgments (16.4%) reflect non-responding defendants. When defendants don't appear, the plaintiff gets default. This includes pro-se debtors who don't know how to respond to AP service.
Consent judgments (7.4%) capture negotiated outcomes where the parties want the judgment entered (e.g., for collateral-estoppel effect, for federal-court enforcement leverage, or for non-dischargeability rulings the parties have negotiated).
Bench trials are rare (3.1%). The median bankruptcy judge sees fewer than 5 AP bench trials per year across all dispositions in their court.

The 20x district variation

The dataset shows enormous district-level variation in AP filing rates per main case:

District	APs	Main cases (Ch.7+13+11)	AP rate per 100
Ohio Northern	672	3,542	18.97
Connecticut	12	114	10.53
NY Southern	12	116	10.34
Maryland	59	842	7.01
Florida Southern	2,648	41,271	6.42
Ohio Southern	35	578	6.06
Virginia Eastern	74	1,262	5.86
Massachusetts	65	1,375	4.73
Florida Middle	152	5,545	2.74
Tennessee Western	41	1,939	2.11
Missouri Western	734	41,513	1.77
Kansas	522	41,087	1.27
California Central	55	5,883	0.93
Illinois Northern	91	10,070	0.90
New Jersey	14	1,633	0.86

What drives this variation:

Local trustee culture: districts with aggressive U.S. Trustees file more § 707(b) abuse motions and § 727 discharge denial APs.
Bar composition: districts with active consumer-protection bar file more § 523(a) non-dischargeability APs on behalf of harmed creditors.
Local rule choice: some districts incorporate AP procedures into the main case; others require separate AP filings.
Trustee compensation structure: § 326 fee caps on trustees may incentivize AP filings (where additional services produce additional compensation) more in some districts than others.

The volume trend

AP filings climbed steadily from sub-100/year in the early 1990s to peak ~370-394/year in 2010-2012, then declined sharply post-2014:

1990s: 26-116/year (steady growth)
2002-2005: 179-208/year (pre-BAPCPA)
2006: 394 (BAPCPA-implementation spike)
2007-2009: 156-268 (post-BAPCPA stabilization)
2010-2013: 308-378 (sustained peak; recession-era contentiousness)
2014-2018: 107-276 (declining)
2019-2026: 33-104 (low; pandemic-era decline)

The 2010-2013 peak corresponds to high foreclosure-crisis-era contentiousness; the 2014+ decline parallels overall bankruptcy filing volume declining; the 2020+ low reflects COVID-era court delays + reduced filing volumes.

Implications for AP practice

For practitioners:

Settlement is the modal outcome. AP filings should be drafted with settlement posture in mind from day one; substantive briefing should reserve resources until necessary.
District-specific AP rate is informative. A creditor evaluating whether to file an AP in a high-AP-rate district faces different procedural-context expectations than in a low-AP-rate district.
Default judgment is common (16.4%). AP plaintiffs should be prepared to pursue defaults expeditiously; AP defendants should treat AP service seriously.

Open dataset

ap_by_district.csv — per-district AP volume + rate per main case
ap_by_year.csv — year-over-year AP volume
ap_dispositions.csv — AP outcome distribution

Citation

Open Bankruptcy Project (2026). Bankruptcy Adversary Proceeding Patterns Dataset, v0.1.
501(c)(3) public charity (EIN 41-5159631).
URL: https://viz.openbankruptcyproject.org/ap-patterns/
License: CC BY 4.0