Commercial Banking, Collections, and Bankruptcy

Public Act 99-612

Topic: 
Common Interest Community Association Act and the Condominium Property Act

(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.

 

 

Public Act 99-609

Topic: 
Land Trust Beneficiary Rights Act

(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.

 

Public Act 99-627

Topic: 
Common Interest Community Association Act

(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.

 

From the Discussions - Can these debtors keep their home after bankruptcy?

August
2016
Article
, Page 31
Q. H & W have $75K equity in a home and own an underwater rental property. Can they keep the home and let the rental property go in bankruptcy?

Public Act 99-567

Topic: 
Common Interest Community Association Act and the Condominium Property Act

(Haine, D-Alton; Martwick, D-Chicago) allows a board to close any portion of a noticed meeting or meet separately from a noticed meeting to do the following: (1) “Discuss” instead of “consider” appointment, employment, engagement, or dismissal of an employee, independent contractor, agent, or other provider of goods and services. (2) Interview a potential employee, independent contractor, agent, or other provider of goods and services. (3) Consult with the association’s legal counsel. Effective January 1, 2017. 

Public Act 99-569

Topic: 
Common Interest Community Association Act and the Condominium Property Act

(Mulroe, D-Chicago; Martwick, D-Chicago) provides that any assignment of a developer’s interest in the property is not effective until the successor obtains the assignment in writing and records it. Effective January 1, 2017.

 

Bank of Commerce v. Hoffman

Federal 7th Circuit Court
Civil Court
Release
Citation
Case Number: 
Nos. 15-3326 & 15-3327 Cons.
Decision Date: 
July 15, 2016
Federal District: 
C.D. Ill.
Holding: 
Affirmed

Dist. Ct. did not err in granting plaintiffs-FDIC and bank’s motion for summary judgment in action seeking to collect on two defaulted loans, even though defendants asserted that language in release in prior settlement agreement between FDIC and defendants with respect to third $157,300 loan between parties covered said loans at issue in instant complaint. Relevant language in release in settlement agreement referred only to $157,300 loan, and although agreement contained language releasing defendants from “any and all liabilities…claims and demands whatsoever,” extrinsic evidence from one defendant indicated that settlement release pertained only to $157,300 loan. Ct. rejected one defendant’s claim that his subjective belief that release covered all three loans was dispositive on issue, where: (1) said belief was contrary to same defendant’s own testimony regarding background of settlement agreement; (2) specific provisions in settlement agreement only referred to $157,300 loan; and (3) specific language in agreement should prevail over general language in agreement when there is a potential conflict in contract language.

Arlington Capital, LLC v. Bainton McCarthy LLC

Federal 7th Circuit Court
Civil Court
Standing
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 15-2543
Decision Date: 
July 11, 2016
Federal District: 
N.D. Ill., E. Div.
Holding: 
Vacated and remanded

General unsecured creditor lacked standing to object to attorney fee petitions submitted to Bankruptcy Trustee by certain law firms, even though creditor argued that work performed by said law firms never had chance of benefiting bankruptcy estate. While Bankruptcy Ct. had approved said fee petitions that arose out of law firm’s pursuit of section 363(n) claim against instant creditor, which purchased debtor’s assets under conditions that Trustee believed had produced lower than market price for said purchase, Bankruptcy Ct. should have dismissed said objection due to creditor’s lack of standing to raise objection given fact that creditor had failed to show that it would have benefited financially if it would have prevailed in said objection. Moreover, record showed that other creditors with higher priority would have received any proceeds had creditor prevailed in its objection.