(Breen, R-Lombard; Nybo, R-Lombard) extends the time in which a person may file a civil action if a person files a timely request for review under Section 3.5 of the Act. The civil action must be filed within 60 days of the decision by the Attorney General to resolve a request for review by a means other than the issuance of a binding opinion under Section 3.5(a).
Effective August 5, 2016.
Dist. Ct. erred in denying trustee’s request to avoid under sections 544, 548(a)(1)(b) and 550 of Bankruptcy Code $16.5 million payment that debtor made to defendant for purchase of stock, even though defendant argued that said transfer was protected from being undone by safe harbor provisions in section 546(e) of Bankruptcy Code, because: (1) instant transfers of money passed through financial institutions from debtor to defendant; and (2) section 546(e) precludes trustee from avoiding transfer that is margin payment or settlement payment made “by or to” financial institution. Ct. found that safe harbor provisions contained in section 546(e) applied only if transfer was made by debtor to financial institution to pay off debt owed to financial institution, and not where financial institution was merely passing money from debtor to third-party.
Dist. Ct. did not err in affirming Bankruptcy Ct.’s order in Chapter 7 proceeding, finding that debtor’s transfer of her 40-acre farm to father of her children constituted fraudulent transfer, where debtor was insolvent at time of transfer, and where debtor had failed to receive reasonable equivalent value in exchange for said property. Record showed that: (1) debtor and father of her children were involved in litigation over ownership of said farm at time of transfer; (2) debtor received no cash for transferring property, but received promise from father of her children to drop his lawsuit against her and to assume $149,000 in farm-related liabilities; and (3) farm had fair market value of $300,000 at time of transfer. As such Bankruptcy Ct. could properly find that debtor had not received reasonably equivalent value for her farm, where: (1) value of litigation was next to nothing where father of her children had lost his case against debtor at trial court level; and (2) debtor did not receive anything for her $151,000 in net equity in farm. Moreover, any benefit in avoiding further family conflict over ownership of farm was too nebulous to constitute reasonable equivalent value, where said transfer would put debtor’s property beyond reach of creditors.
Bankruptcy Ct. did not err in denying Trustee’s challenge to $292,185.97 in annuity exemptions claimed by debtor under Wisc. Statute in instant Chapter 7 bankruptcy petition. Wisconsin statute (Wisc. Stat. section 815.18(3)(j)) fully exempts certain annuity contracts that comply with provisions of Internal Revenue Code, and instant annuity contracts qualified for said exemption since they paid benefits by reason of age and death and otherwise qualified for tax-deferred status under 26 USC section 72. Ct. rejected Trustee’s argument that instant annuity contracts could qualify for said exemption only if they complied with 26 USC sections 401-09, which generally concerns tax-deferred, “qualified” retirement plans.
(Cassidy, D-Chicago; Mulroe, D-Chicago) redefines “acceptable technological means” to mean any generally available technology that, by rule of the association, is deemed to provide reasonable security, reliability, identification, and verifiability. Allows acceptable technological means to be used to conduct association business such as a notice required to be sent or received; signature, vote, consent, or approval required to be obtained; and the performance of obligations or exercise of rights. It does not apply to any notices required under the Forcible Entry and Detainer Article or in connection with foreclosure proceedings in enforcement of any lien rights under the Acts.
Effective January 1, 2017.
(Williams, D-Chicago; Hastings, D-Matteson) provides that the rights of a beneficial owner may not be impaired in any way by the change of trustees if the identity of the trustee of a land trust has been changed by virtue of sale, assignment, appointment, or otherwise, but the beneficial owner or owners of the land trust remain unchanged. Provides that a change of trustees by a sale, acquisition, or appointment governed by the Corporate Fiduciaries Act is not a bar or defense to any court action filed by or in the name of either the previous trustee or the new trustee, regardless of whether the court action was originally filed in a representative capacity on behalf of the beneficial owner or owners.
Effective January 1, 2017.
(Haine, D-Alton; Beiser, D-Alton) allows an association to correct an error, omission, or inconsistency in the community instruments of the association by an amendment adopted by vote of two-thirds of the board of directors without a membership vote. This applies to correct an omission, error, or inconsistency so that the community instruments conform to the Act or to another applicable law. Effective January 1, 2017.
(Link, D-Gurnee; Jackson, D- E. St. Louis) reduces from seven to five years before unclaimed property held by the government or court is considered to be abandoned. Effective January 1, 2017.
(Hernandez, D-Cicero; Martinez, D-Chicago) increases the amount of civil penalties for civil rights violations in real estate transactions. Effective January 1, 2017.