(Court opinion corrected 4/27/17.) Plaintiff filed replevin action for Porsche. Court properly ordered possession of Porsche awarded to Plaintiff, as later purchaser had obtained title based on previous owner’s fraudulent lien release letter. (SCHOSTOK and SPENCE, concurring.)
Defendants filed Section 2-1401 petition to vacate personal deficiency judgment entered against them in foreclosure. Court properly struck and dismissed Section 2-1401 petition as barred by Section 15-1509( c) of Illinois Mortgage Foreclosure Law. Section 15-1509(c ) is clear that all claims of parties to foreclosure are barred, and it does not conflict with other statements in Foreclosure Law. (HARRIS and MIKVA, concurring.)
Defendant homeowners stopped paying their mortgage and warranty deed bearing Defendants' signatures conveyed home to buyers who obtained mortgage, and some of loan proceeds were used to extinguish Defendants' mortages on property. Once buyers' lender's assignor paid off Defendants' mortgages, assignor was subrogated, by operation of law, and it stepped into the shoes of Defendants' mortgage lenders. Thus, buyers' lender acquired priority interest in subject property. Court properly granted assignor's motion for summary judgment, predicated on doctrine of equitable subrogation. (HYMAN and PIERCE, concurring.)
(Koehler, D-Peoria) repeals the Dwelling Structure Contract Act and the Dwelling Unit Installment Contract Act. Creates the Installment Sales Contract Act. Adds provisions governing: definitions; terms and conditions of installment sales contracts; applicability of other Acts; sales of condemned dwelling structures; repairs; account statements; transfer of payments; insurance proceeds; unlawful acts; waivers; and penalties. Makes corresponding changes in the Condominium Property Act. Amends the Code of Civil Procedure. Provides that a real estate installment contract for residential real estate is subject to the foreclosure provisions of the Code if the purchase price is to be paid in installments over a period in excess of one year (instead of five years) and the amount unpaid under the terms of the contract at the time of the filing of the foreclosure complaint, including principal and due and unpaid interest, at the rate prior to default, is less than 90% (instead of 80%) of the original purchase price of the real estate as stated in the contract. Effective January 1, 2018. It is on third reading in the Senate.
Condo Association filed forcible entry and detainer action against condo unit owners for their failure to pay assessments.Court within its discretion in denying the Defendants’ motion for new trial where court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the Notice and Demand or the account ledger into evidence. Court properly denied Defendants' Section 2-1110 motion for judgment and motion to reconsider, Court properly awarded attorney fees expended on behalf of Condo Association, but award vacated as to amounts expended for defense of 3rd-party complaint. (NEVILLE and MASON, concurring.)
Plaintiff needed to file a foreclosure complaint before the expiration of his judgment lien on real estate, if he wished to enforce his lien against property after it was conveyed to another party. A judgment debtor may lawfully convey property to a 3rd-party during life of enforceable judgment lien without notifying judgment creditor and satisfying the lien, but such conveyance does nothing to impair judgment creditor's lien rights. (HUDSON and JORGENSEN, concurring.)
Appeal from mortgage foreclosure action as to residential property. Plaintiff failed to conduct any type inquiry into where Defendant may be living after finding property vacant. Due diligence affidavit does not identify any type of investigation into Defendant’s current location.Thus, Defendant was not properly served and court never obtained personal jurisdiction over her. Court lacked jurisdiction to default Defendant, or in entering default judgment. (CONNORS and SIMON, concurring.)
(Court opinion corrected 3/27/17.) Declaratory judgment in dispute over licensing of 20 parking spaces in parking lot, along property line. Contract is ambiguous as to whether use of 20 parking spaces is exclusive or nonexclusive, and interpretations offered by the parties renders other contract provisions meaningless. Court erred in entering summary judgment for Plaintiff. (ROCHFORD and DELORT, concurring.)
This case presents question as to whether trial court properly dismissed for failure to state cause of action plaintiff’s lawsuit alleging that defendant breached terms of oil and gas lease in that defendant, as assignee of 25 percent of said lease, failed to continue payment of overriding royalties to plaintiff out of oil extracted from leased land. Trial court found that, under terms of lease assignment to defendant, plaintiff had failed to reserve any overriding royalty interest to herself. Appellate Court, in reversing trial court, found that lease assignment contained exception that required defendant to assume and be bound by each assignor’s rights with respect to overriding royalties, and that said exception required defendant to pay plaintiff overriding royalty that plaintiff had previously obtained from others under instant lease. (Dissent filed.)