Real Estate Law

Court properly granted bank's motion to strike and dismiss Defendants' 3rd amended counterclaim with prejudice. Bank's acceptance of Defendants' payments from 2011-14 was only an act of leniency and was not an offer, Defendants failed to show that there was a valid offer of a 20-year loan initially or that there was an offer to extend terms of loan. Defendants failed to establish any allegation of consideration. According to terms of original loan documents, bank was already authorized to charge 6-18% interest for installments due under credit agreement. Payments alleged in Defendants' motion to reconsider were not additional interest providing consideration for alleged extension agreement. (LAMPKIN and ROCHFORD, concurring.)

Condominium owner sought permanent injunction to prevent Condo Association Board from levying a $1.01 million special assessment to remediate all 90 balconies in her residential condo complex, and from executing a contract to perform the work. Court properly denied request for permanent injunction. Record clearly shows that raisings of 56 of the 90 balconies posed imminent safety risks to the unit owners and constituted an "emergency", and were not compliant with local building code requirement. Record showed that 80-85% of cost of remediation project had to be incurred to address only these 56 most dangerous balconies, with remaining portion of the cost being incurred for preventative maintenance. (BURKE and GORDON, concurring.)

Plaintiff, a real estate investment company, was foreclosure sale purchaser of condominium unit. Condo association issued a paid assessment letter, at Plaintiff’s request, stating total amount due. Plaintiff paid that amount under protest. First assessments came due the month after the foreclosure sale. Plaintiff’s payment of 1^st assessment was prompt, as it was made shortly after confirmation of sale, and thus their payment extinguished the prior section 9(g)(1) lien on the condo unit. Plaintiff had no obligation to pay any assessments that had accrued before it acquired title.Reversed and remanded for entry of judgment in favor of Plaintiff for a portion of payment it made under protest.  (CUNNINGHAM and DELORT, concurring.)

Bank filed mortgage foreclosure complaint, and copy of mortgage was attached to complaint. Court properly granted plaintiff's motion for leave to file amended complaint to substitute plaintiff for Bank as the named Plaintiff in foreclosure case.Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed its complaint, and no part of it resulted in a final judgment. Plaintiff refiled its complaint well within remaining limitations period of 10 years. Court properly granted Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, as Defendant failed to identify questions of fact as to grace period notice of Plaintiff's status as holder of the note, and evidence in record that grace period notice was mailed to Defendant. Court properly confirmed judicial sale. Even if Plaintiff went out of business, its foreclosure action was commenced within 5 years of dissolution, and was thus entitled to proceed with action.(BURKE and ELLIS, concurring.)