Legal Infrastructure Organizes Eviction: Evidence from Philadelphia
Fuente:
arXiv
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Preprint |
| Publicado: |
2026
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| _version_ | 1866917513636347904 |
|---|---|
| author | Papamichalis, Marios Ruane, Regina |
| author_facet | Papamichalis, Marios Ruane, Regina |
| contents | We analyze the filing-side legal infrastructure of eviction using 755,004 Philadelphia Municipal Court landlord-tenant records filed between 1969 and 2022, of which 747,125 are residential. Eviction in Philadelphia is organized upstream by a concentrated plaintiff-side bar, durable plaintiff-attorney dependence, repeated use of the same properties, and recurring tenant-name exposure. Between 1983 and 2022, the ten most active plaintiff attorneys handled 82.2% of represented plaintiff-side cases per year on average, compared with 14.8% for the ten most active plaintiffs. Large plaintiffs depend heavily on a single attorney: among plaintiffs filing at least 101 cases, 78.3% of each plaintiff's filings are handled by that plaintiff's most-used attorney, on average. Repetition is likewise central to the docket. Across the residential filing universe, 48.8% of cases occur at addresses with a prior filing in the preceding year, and 23.6% at addresses with six or more prior filings; these repeats are usually filed by the same plaintiff and follow a more default-heavy, less agreement-heavy pathway. We further examine a narrower mechanism: strict switches into specialist plaintiff-side counsel, defined as a plaintiff changing attorney to one in the prior-year top ten. Filing counts rise around the switch with non-flat pre-trends, indicating organizational reconfiguration rather than a clean exogenous shock. Within-plaintiff and within-plaintiff-property comparisons yield more stable estimates: judgment by agreement, fee share, waiver language, and corrected lockout-trigger language decline, while deadline language rises. We interpret eviction as a layered upstream process in which concentrated counsel, repeated places, and recurring tenants produce filings before any courtroom bargaining or adjudication occurs. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2604_21212 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2026 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Legal Infrastructure Organizes Eviction: Evidence from Philadelphia Papamichalis, Marios Ruane, Regina Applications We analyze the filing-side legal infrastructure of eviction using 755,004 Philadelphia Municipal Court landlord-tenant records filed between 1969 and 2022, of which 747,125 are residential. Eviction in Philadelphia is organized upstream by a concentrated plaintiff-side bar, durable plaintiff-attorney dependence, repeated use of the same properties, and recurring tenant-name exposure. Between 1983 and 2022, the ten most active plaintiff attorneys handled 82.2% of represented plaintiff-side cases per year on average, compared with 14.8% for the ten most active plaintiffs. Large plaintiffs depend heavily on a single attorney: among plaintiffs filing at least 101 cases, 78.3% of each plaintiff's filings are handled by that plaintiff's most-used attorney, on average. Repetition is likewise central to the docket. Across the residential filing universe, 48.8% of cases occur at addresses with a prior filing in the preceding year, and 23.6% at addresses with six or more prior filings; these repeats are usually filed by the same plaintiff and follow a more default-heavy, less agreement-heavy pathway. We further examine a narrower mechanism: strict switches into specialist plaintiff-side counsel, defined as a plaintiff changing attorney to one in the prior-year top ten. Filing counts rise around the switch with non-flat pre-trends, indicating organizational reconfiguration rather than a clean exogenous shock. Within-plaintiff and within-plaintiff-property comparisons yield more stable estimates: judgment by agreement, fee share, waiver language, and corrected lockout-trigger language decline, while deadline language rises. We interpret eviction as a layered upstream process in which concentrated counsel, repeated places, and recurring tenants produce filings before any courtroom bargaining or adjudication occurs. |
| title | Legal Infrastructure Organizes Eviction: Evidence from Philadelphia |
| topic | Applications |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.21212 |