UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
FRANCIS I. McCARTNEY
BEVERLY E. McCARTNEY
Case No. 05-58001-RFH
Chapter 7 (Joint)
UNITED STATES TRUSTEE’S OBJECTION TO
MOTION TO DETERMINE ATTORNEY STATUS
Felicia S. Turner, United States Trustee for Region 21, objects to the Motion to Determine
Attorney Status (the “Motion”) filed by the Debtors, and states:
On October 17, 2005, the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of
2005 (the “BAPCPA”) became effective.
On that same date, the Debtors filed a joint voluntary petition for relief under chapter 7 of title
11 et seq. of the United States Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”). As a result, the provisions of the
BAPCPA apply to this case.
On October 31, 2005, counsel for the Debtors filed the Motion. The facts of this case have
no bearing on the issues the Motion raises or the relief requested therein. Indeed, the Motion only
seeks to inquire whether attorneys are subject to the “debt relief agency” provisions contained in
Sections 526, 527 and 528 of the Bankruptcy Code. As set forth below, the answer to that question
is an unequivocal yes.
AN ATTORNEY CONSTITUTES A “DEBT RELIEF AGENCY”
UNDER THE BAPCPA AND MUST COMPLY WITH ITS REGULATIONS.
In arguing that an attorney should be excluded from the definition of “debt relief agency” and
its attendant regulations, the Motion ignores the statutory framework, legislative history and
1 The sole authority relied on in the Motion is a recent order entered sua sponte by Judge Lamar
W. Davis, Jr. (Bkrtcy. S.D. Ga.) on the morning of the effective date of the BAPCPA. To the
best of the undersigned’s knowledge, that order has not been enforced in any proceeding and, to
the contrary, is pending on appeal before the United States District Court for the Southern
District of Georgia (Case No. 4:05-cv-00206-WTM). Moreover, the order itself acknowledges