Commercial Banking, Collections, and Bankruptcy

Senate Bill 2301

Topic: 
Non-Recourse Civil Litigation Funding Act
(Thapedi, D-Chicago) creates the Non-Recourse Civil Litigation Funding Act. Requires that all contracts for non-recourse civil litigation funding must meet specified criteria. The contract must allow the consumer to cancel the contract within five business days after the consumer receives the funds without penalty or further obligation. Specifies the notice requirements for contracts and sets requirements for fee calculations. Prohibits unregistered companies from doing these transactions with consumers. Requires the Department of Financial and Professional Regulation to consider certain criteria while making decisions regarding registration. The Department is to make and enforce reasonable rules and regulations as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of the Act. Just introduced.

Senate Bill 1728

Topic: 
Mortgage foreclosure and recording of instruments
(Collins, D-Chicago) make a number of changes to the mortgage foreclosure article intending to better protect consumers. It also amends the Conveyances Act affecting the recording of deeds, mortgages, and other instruments. Amends the Conveyances Act. (1) Provides that those provisions also apply to the recording of assignments, mortgage releases, mortgage modifications, land equity loans, liens, lis pendens, and memoranda of judgment. (2) Changes the scope to instruments that affect interests in real property. (3) Provides that deeds and title papers are void until recorded (instead of void until recorded as to creditors and subsequent purchasers) with the recorder's office in the county in which the property is located. Just introduced.

JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. v. Asia Pulp & Paper Co. Ltd.

Federal 7th Circuit Court
Civil Court
Contracts
Citation
Case Number: 
Nos. 10-3413 & 12-2123 Cons.
Decision Date: 
February 21, 2013
Federal District: 
N.D. Ill., E. Div.
Holding: 
Affirmed and dismissed in part
Dist. Ct. did not err in entering judgment in favor of plaintiff in contract action alleging that defendant failed to pay over $53 million on two contracts to purchase paper-making machines that were guaranteed by defendant even though defendant argued that manufacturer breached several implied warranties with respect to construction of said paper-making machines and misrepresented its design and construction expertise. Record showed that defendant had entered into prior settlement agreement with manufacturer that released all of defendant’s claims pertaining to construction, sale and installation of said paper-making machines, but specifically preserved defendant’s obligation to pay on purchasing notes. Ct. also rejected defendant’s promissory fraud claim that manufacturer had falsely represented that instant notes were temporary in nature, and that other financing would be secured, where Illinois does not recognize cause of action for promissory fraud.

In the Matter of Castleton Plaza, LP

Federal 7th Circuit Court
Civil Court
Bankruptcy
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 12-2639
Decision Date: 
February 14, 2013
Federal District: 
S.D. Ind., Indianapolis Div.
Holding: 
Reversed and remanded
In Chapter 11 bankruptcy action in which debtor proposed reorganization plan that called for wife of debtor’s current equity holder to provide $375,000 in new money in exchange for 100 percent equity in reorganized entity, while requiring objecting creditor to obtain less than full value of his secured debt, Bankruptcy Ct. erred in approving said plan without allowing creditors or anyone else opportunity to competitively bid on plan, and then distributing equity interest to wife as “insider.” Ct. further noted that proposed plan also called for current equity holder to continue his $500,000 management contract with debtor.

Senate Bill 1602

Topic: 
Mortgage foreclosure
(Collins, D-Chicago) does four things in the mortgage foreclosure article. (1) Allows the landlord terminate a tenancy established before the confirmation of sale only (a) at the end of the term of the lease agreement by written notice issued not earlier than 90 days before the end of the term of the lease; or (b) in the case of a month-to-month or week-to-week tenancy, by 90 days' written notice. (2) Entry of a judgment of foreclosure does not terminate or otherwise affect the rights or interest of any occupant of a dwelling unit who has a lease or tenancy resulting from an arm's-length transaction and who is not the mortgagor, whether or not the occupant has been made a party in the foreclosure. (3) The holder of the certificate of sale, the holder of the deed issued under that certificate, or if no certificate or deed was issued, the purchaser at the sale shall: (a) assume the lease or tenancy of the mortgaged real estate resulting from an arm's length transaction entered into before the confirmation of sale; (b) assume any federal, state, or local housing subsidy contract for the dwelling unit for the duration of the contract or the assumed lease, whichever is shorter; (c) assume his or her interest in the mortgaged real estate subject to the rights of any occupant; and (d) not terminate the occupancy or any occupant's tenancy except as otherwise provided in the Code. (4) Requires the purchaser who offers money or other valuable consideration to an occupant of a dwelling unit as an incentive to vacate the premises to tender the offer in accordance with specified conditions. Just introduced.

Central States Southeast and Southwest Areas Pension Fund v. Messina Products, LLC

Federal 7th Circuit Court
Civil Court
ERISA
Citation
Case Number: 
Nos. 11-3513 & 12-1333 Cons.
Decision Date: 
February 8, 2013
Federal District: 
N.D. Ill., E. Div.
Holding: 
Affirmed and reversed in part and remanded
In action alleging that employer and related entities owed $3.1 million in withdrawal liability when employer (Messina Trucking) permanently ceased to have obligation to contribute to multiemployer pension fund, Dist. Ct. erred in finding that owners of Messina Trucking, who also owned and leased several residential properties adjacent to Messina Trucking, as well as leased property from which Messina Trucking conducted its operations, were not engaged in “trade or business” that would have rendered owners jointly liable for withdrawal liability incurred by Messina Trucking. While Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act does not impose liability for withdrawing employers on purely passive investment entities, under SCOFBP, 668 F.3d 873, instant leasing of property to Messina Trucking by owners of Messina Trucking constituted “trade or business” that subjected said owners to withdrawal liability incurred by Messina Trucking.

House Bill 1447

Topic: 
Consumer fraud and attorney's fees
(Thapedi, D-Chicago) requires that the court use the “Laffey Matrix” prepared by the U.S. Department of Justice in awarding attorney’s fees to the prevailing party under the Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act. Excludes cases in which the hourly rate for attorney’s fees is limited by statute. Just introduced.

Farnick v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp.

Federal 7th Circuit Court
Civil Court
Banking
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 11-1601
Decision Date: 
February 5, 2013
Federal District: 
N.D. Ill., E. Div.
Holding: 
Vacated and remanded
Dist. Ct. lacked jurisdiction to consider plaintiffs’ action against defendant-insolvent bank alleging that said bank engaged in deception by failing to base their interest rates on certain index rate as promised by said bank, where record showed that FDIC was substituted as party defendant after it had been appointed receiver for insolvent bank, and where FDIC removed action to federal court under section 1819(b)(2)(A) of FIRREA. Under section 1821(d)(3)(d)(13) of FIRREA, FDIC has statutory authority to administer claims against insolvent bank for which it has been appointed receiver, and courts lack jurisdiction to consider such claims where, as here, plaintiffs failed to previously present their claim to FDIC. Ct. rejected plaintiffs’ claim that real defendant was successor bank to insolvent bank, after noting that allegations of misconduct in complaint were solely against insolvent bank.