Commercial Banking, Collections, and Bankruptcy

US Bank National Association v. Villasenor

US Bank National Association v. Villasenor
Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
Mortgage Foreclosure
Citation
Case Number: 
2012 IL App (1st) 120061
Decision Date: 
Friday, October 5, 2012
District: 
1st Dist.
Division/County: 
Cook Co.,6th Div.
Holding: 
Affirmed.
Justice: 
GORDON
Equitable mortgage has all the effects of recordation when land was in possession by someone other than the record owner. Equitable mortgage also requires that bank foreclose on interests of occupant and tenant of house, as bank was imputed with inquiry notice of mortgagee's interest based on occupant/tenant's possession of the house. Bank's duty to inquire further before issuing loan and mortgage is a duty imputed by law, and as bank failed to so inquire, it is not a bona fide mortgagee without notice. (HALL and GARCIA, concurring.)

Urban Sites of Chicago v. Crown Castle USA, LLC

Urban Sites of Chicago v. Crown Castle USA, LLC
Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
Leases
Citation
Case Number: 
2012 IL App (1st) 111880
Decision Date: 
Tuesday, October 9, 2012
District: 
1st Dist.
Division/County: 
Cook Co.,1st Div.
Holding: 
Affirmed.
Justice: 
CUNNINGHAM
Express language in estoppel certificate in contract shows there was a meeting of the minds to increase leased area, and as acknowledged by initials on copies of original site plan. By executing the contract, Plaintiff represented that lease contained entire agreement between landlord and tenant as to leased property for equipment and antenna structure. (HOFFMAN and ROCHFORD, concurring.)

Parent v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc.

Federal 7th Circuit Court
Parent v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc.
Civil Court
Consumer Law
Citation
Case Number: 
No. E.D. Wisc.
Decision Date: 
September 24, 2012
Federal District: 
E.D. Wisc.
Holding: 
Affirmed
Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment in action alleging violations of Wisc. Consumer Act arising out of defendant’s failure to remove $9,761.64 charge that had been transferred to plaintiffs’ account with defendant for purchase of goods on charge card issued by third-party. While plaintiffs alleged that defendant had either directly or indirectly made attempt to collect on debt so as to trigger protections under Act, Dist. Ct. could properly find that defendant did not violate Act since only third-party, as owner of plaintiffs' credit card account, took steps to collect on instant debt. Fact that defendant may have relied on third-party to get paid for sale of its goods to plaintiffs was irrelevant and insufficient to establish violation of Act.

Harris N.A. v. Harris

Harris N.A. v. Harris
Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
Forfeiture
Citation
Case Number: 
2012 IL App (1st) 113813
Decision Date: 
Tuesday, September 4, 2012
District: 
1st Dist.
Division/County: 
Cook Co.,1st Div.
Holding: 
Affirmed.
Justice: 
HOFFMAN
Court properly entered summary judgment for bank against former married couple, alleging that husband had defaulted on a note and had fraudulently transferred assets to wife. Stipulated agreement between wife and U.S. limited reach of forfeiture judgment to two real properties. That agreement put a value on marital estate does not change scope of husband's forfeiture, and forfeiture does not bereave him of any property interests he could have transferred fraudulently. Wife had access to more than $1 million in her own funds, thus belying her claim that she needed to sell assets to pay for household expenses. (HALL and KARNEZIS, concurring.)

House Bill 3636

Topic: 
Mechanics Lien Act
(Burke, D-Evergreen Park; Mulroe, D-Chicago) does three things in response to the LaSalle Bank National Association vs. Cypress Creek opinion. (1) Requires that the owner or interested person’s demand for suit to be commenced or answered within 30 days must contain this language in at least 10-point, boldface type: “Failure to respond to this notice within 30 days after receipt, as required by Section 34 of the Mechanics Lien Act, shall result in the forfeiture of the referenced lien.” (2) Defines a “lien creditor” as someone who does work or furnishes material under this Act. A lien creditor is preferred over other encumbrances except that previous encumbrances are preferred only to the extent of the value of the land at the time the contract was made for the improvements, and each lien creditor is preferred to the value of all later improvements regardless of whether the lien creditor provided those improvements. (3) If the sale proceeds are insufficient to satisfy claims of both prior encumbrances and lien creditors, the sale proceeds are to be distributed as follows. (a) Any previous encumbrance has a paramount lien in the portion of the proceeds attributable to the value of the land at the time of making of the contract for improvements. (b) Any lien creditors have a paramount lien in the portion of the proceeds attributable to all later improvements made to the property. (4) It has an immediate effective date. House Bill 3636 is in the House awaiting concurrence on Senate Amendment No. 2.
View Full Text of Legislation

In re: Knight-Celotex, LLC

Federal 7th Circuit Court
In re: Knight-Celotex, LLC
Civil Court
Bankruptcy
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 11-3588
Decision Date: 
September 5, 2012
Federal District: 
N.D. Ill., E. Div.
Holding: 
Affirmed
In bankruptcy proceedings involving corporate entity, as well as principal owner of said entity, in which law firm represented individual who was Trustee for both corporate entity and principal owners in their bankruptcy petitions, Bankruptcy Ct. did not err in rejecting principal owner's objection to Trustee assigning to creditor claims that corporate entity had lodged against principal owner, even though principal owner argued that Trustee was judicially estopped from making said assignment. While principal owner contended that Trustee had disavowed said claims against him prior their assignment since, according to principal owner, approval of law firm's retention agreement signaled that Trustee held no interests adverse to principal owner based on certain representations made by law firm in retention agreement application, Ct. found that judicial estoppel did not apply since Trustee never explicitly disavowed said claims against principal owner or expressed any interest in abandoning said claims. Moreover, Ct. noted that all parties were aware of Trustee's continued interest in said claims at time of law firm's retention agreement application.

Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha, Ltd. v. Plano Molding Co.

Federal 7th Circuit Court
Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha, Ltd. v. Plano Molding Co.
Civil Court
Contract
Citation
Case Number: 
Nos. 11-2949 & 11-2967 Cons.
Decision Date: 
August 29, 2012
Federal District: 
N.D. Ill., E. Div.
Holding: 
Affirmed and reversed in part and remanded
Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendant's motion for summary judgment in action alleging that steel injection molds purchased by defendant were improperly packed during shipment of molds to defendant and fell onto railroad track that caused derailment of plaintiff's train, as well as caused damage to property of others on said train, where "K-Line" bill of lading, which was one of two bases for imposing liability on defendant for derailment, named other entities as shipper and consignee, and where plaintiffs failed to show either that consignee was agent of defendant or that defendant had power to control consignee, which otherwise served as coordinator of molds' transportation from China to U.S. However, Dist. erred in granting defendant's summary judgment motion with respect to separate "World" bill of lading, where record contained triable issue as to whether defendant actually made arrangements with consignee to ship molds, and where terms of "World" bill of lading would make defendant liable for instant derailment.

Stuller, Inc. v. Steak N Shake Enterprises, Inc.

Federal 7th Circuit Court
Stuller, Inc. v. Steak N Shake Enterprises, Inc.
Civil Court
Injunction
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 11-2656
Decision Date: 
August 24, 2012
Federal District: 
C.D. Ill.
Holding: 
Affirmed
In action seeking declaration that plaintiff-franchisee was not required to comply with new pricing policy generated by defendant-franchisor, Dist. Ct. did not err in granting plaintiff's request of issuance of preliminary injunction to prevent defendant from enforcing said policy and/or terminating franchise agreement during pendency of lawsuit. Record showed that plaintiff had likelihood of success based on language in franchise agreement, and plaintiff demonstrated that it had no adequate legal remedy where implementation of policy that required 50% pricing reduction or else face termination of franchise agreement held potential for plaintiff's loss of good will and reputation if plaintiff prevailed on merits and attempted to raise prices back to existing level.

Public Act 97-966

Topic: 
Mechanics Lien Act
(Althoff, R-Crystal Lake; Tyron, R-Crystal Lake) requires work to be done or materials furnished within three years for residential property and five years for any other kind of property. Senate Bill 3792 sunsets on January 1, 2016; at which time the limitation then reverts to three years for any kind of property at that time. Effective January 1, 2013.
View Full Text of Legislation