Issues related to the nature of correspondence/communications with the Subchapter V Trustee

Specifically, the issue relates to how and when such communications are protected (or put the other way, is it subject to discovery?). Candidly, I have heard the matter tangentially discussed at a few CLEs and cringed at certain of the responses given by the Subchapter V panelists. I do not think the responses were all correct, and I certainly would not follow some of the suggested conduct. I am not meaning to be critical. I feel for the panelists who were not really prepared to discuss the topic, given that it was tangential to the prepared presentation, and there had not been much authority on the topic. My course of action when I serve as the Subchapter V Trustee is always to state that I will not voluntarily repeat anything if asked not to and normally only share information that I have been specifically authorized to share. But, I always emphasize that communication with me is likely subject to discovery absent further order of the Court. In two of my cases, confidentiality became an issue and we prepared to file pleadings to have the matter addressed; but the issue ultimately was resolved without the need for Court intervention. I certainly expect this to continue to be a prevalent concern in many matters. I originally wanted to mention this issue to the Subchapter V Taskforce but, also, believe a panel on the nature of communications with the Subchapter V Trustee would be a great topic. There is so much that could be explored/discussed: requirements of Subchapter V Trustee to keep communications confidential, does counsel violate duties to clients if they do not seek such communication in discovery for contested matters, ways to address confidentiality of communications with Subchapter V Trustee (such as local rule, sua sponte inclusion in orders like certain jurisdictions are doing for the escrowing of Subchapter V monthly fee payments, and/or upon motion, notice and entry of order similar to the motions that became the norm in large, traditional 11s to address communications with the creditors committee) and so much more! If you agree that this is a topic deserving more consideration, I would be happy (and welcome the opportunity) to further collaborate as well as serve on any such panel.