Real Estate Law

Plaintiffs (sellers) sued Defendants (buyers) for breach of contract arising from a real estate transaction; court awarded them $5608 plus costs, and denied their petition for attorney fees.  Sale contract, which contained short sale addendum, was for $410,000; buyers refused to close due to dispute with their lender. Plaintiffs then sold property, in short sale, to another buyer for $375,000. Collateral-source rule is not implicated, because bank absorbed the loss, and loan forgiveness was not a payment to Plaintiffs but a necessary condition for Plaintiffs to sell the property, and Plaintiffs agreed, as a condition of short sale, to walk away from transaction with zero. Contract for short sale does not relieve a plaintiff from having to prove an actual loss. (HUTCHINSON and HUDSON, concurring.)

Section 22-35 of Property Tax Code does not  include special district liens, and thus the legislature did not intend to allow them as a basis to petition for a sale in error on the basis of such a lien. (SCHOSTOK and SPENCE, concurring.)

Court properly dismissed pro se complaint for wrongful foreclosure. Complaint was barred by section 15-1509(c ) of Mortgage Foreclosure Law, as a final judgment had been entered in foreclosure action and title to property had vested in another entity. Section 15-15-9(c ) of Foreclosure Law operates as an entire bar of all claims of the parties to a foreclosure after title has vested by deed. Order substituting Plaintiff as the party plaintiff was not void, as court had personal jurisdiction over Defendants and also subject-matter jurisdiction. (McBRIDE and BURKE, concurring)

In mortgage foreclosure action, Plaintiff bank sought a deficiency judgment solely against Defendant Laskowski, an individual whose loan was secured by a mortgage on residential property. The  LLC (of which Laskowski was the sole member) to whom Laskowski purported to grant an equitable interest in the property by recorded Memorandum of Equitable Interest, was not a party against whom personal liability is asserted, and is not a mortgagor.Thus, Plaintiff bank was not required to serve process on LLC and court properly dismissed its Section 2-1401 petition to quash service and vacate the default judgment. As a bona fide purchaser had already purchased the property, LLC cannot collaterally attack foreclosure judgment.(PUCINSKI and MASON, concurring.)

Court entered judgment for Plaintiff bank in foreclosure action as to owner-occupied single-family home. Court does have personal jurisdiction over Defendant (who is pro se), as she filed a general appearance, a verified answer, and numerous motions. Defendant failed to prove Plaintiff's lack of standing. Record contains assignment of mortgage, in which original lender assigned mortgage to Plaintiff. Record shows that Defendant had advance notice of the judicial sale. Defendant may not raise arguments on behalf on any other party.(McBRIDE and REYES, concurring.)