Real Estate Law

Public Act 97-1093

Topic: 
New probate fee
(Silverstein, D-Chicago; Feigenholtz, D-Chicago) creates a $100 fee to open a decedent's estate to fund the State Guardianship and Advocacy Commission. It exempts indigents, the State Guardian, any state agency, any local public guardian, and any state's attorney. It is unknown whether this violates the constitutional nexus between a fee and a service or whether this starts a new trend in financing state government. If constitutional, what's to prevent a new fee next year on all family law litigants to fund DCFS? (2) It also allows the court to appoint a limited guardian for a disabled adult who lacks some but not all of the required capacity. If the court finds that the ward is totally without the required capacity, it may appoint a plenary guardian. (3) It adds criteria for the termination of the guardianship or modification of the guardian's duties. Effective January 1, 2013.

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 for improvements. 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. It has an immediate effective date. House Bill 3636 is in the House awaiting concurrence on Senate Amendment No. 2.

Senate Bill 16

Topic: 
Fast-track mortgage forecosure
(Collins, D-Chicago; Lyons, D-Chicago) creates an expedited judgment and sale procedure for abandoned residential property. An additional filing fee will be imposed on plaintiffs in a tiered system in which the fees increase in proportion to the number of foreclosures a plaintiff prosecutes. The fees will also pay for "housing counseling" for residents who are going through the foreclosure process in effort to help them save their homes. Clarifies that a portion of the Conveyances Act is permissive instead of mandatory to prevent that portion of the Act from affecting the validity of a properly recorded mortgage by a trustee in bankruptcy. House Amendment 8 becomes the bill and is positioned to move during this veto session.

Senate Bill 3180

Topic: 
Title Insurance Act
(Mulroe, D-Chicago; Lang, D-Skokie) carves out an exception to the prohibition against a title insurance company, title insurance agent, or independent escrowee making disbursements in connection with any escrows, settlements, or closings out of a fiduciary trust account or accounts. The exception that Senate Bill 3180 creates is if the funds are good funds and the title insurance company, title insurance agent, or independent escrowee and the financial institution are known to each other and agree to the use of these funds. Passed the Senate this spring and scheduled for a hearing Tuesday in House Executive Committee.

Martinez v. River Park Place

Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
Real Estate Contract
Citation
Case Number: 
2012 IL App (1st) 111478
Decision Date: 
Tuesday, November 20, 2012
District: 
1st Dist.
Division/County: 
Cook Co.,2d Div.
Holding: 
Affirmed.
Justice: 
QUINN
Court properly held that Defendant's breach of contracts to purchase two condominium units in a planned development in Elgin were limited to a return of plaintiffs' earnest money and nominal damages of $1 each, rather than damages equal to difference between contract prices for condominium units and market prices. Purchase agreement did not contain a valid and enforceable liquidated damages provision. Plaintiffs had the burden of proving fair market value on the date of the breach, and without such evidence they were entitled to only nominal damages. (HARRIS and CONNORS, concurring.)

Seth v. Aqua at Lakeshore East

Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
Condominium Law
Citation
Case Number: 
2012 IL App (1st) 120438
Decision Date: 
Wednesday, September 26, 2012
District: 
1st Dist.
Division/County: 
Cook Co., 3d Div.
Holding: 
Reversed and remanded.
Justice: 
STEELE
Plaintiffs' actual knowledge of the unrecorded declaration is "the functional equivalent of recording" meeting requirements of Section 22 of Illinois Condominium Property Act, even if Section 22 requires a recorded declaration. Thus, court improperly ruled that Plaintiffs were entitled to rescind purchase agreements on proposed condo development because developer failed to provide them with a recorded declaration. (SALONE and STERBA, concurring.)

Is the Real Estate Lawyer an Endangered Species?

By Joseph R. Fortunato
October
2012
Column
, Page 556
A recent title insurance case illustrates how much things have changed.

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.

Chicago Title Land Trust Company v. JS II

Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
Easements
Citation
Case Number: 
2012 IL App (1st) 063420
Decision Date: 
Friday, August 24, 2012
District: 
1st Dist.
Division/County: 
Cook Co.,6th Div.
Holding: 
Affirmed.
Justice: 
GARCIA
Dispute between adjacent landowners over right-of-way, formerly owned by railroad company, crossing both properties and intersecting three driveways on Plaintiff's land. Court properly found that Plaintiff owns three prescriptive easements and entered injunction against Defendant to prevent future harm to easements, and properly awarded nominal and punitive damages in light of clear trespass committed with intention to harass Plaintiff. Plaintiff's motion to reinstate its claim of ownership by reversion was not timely filed, as reinstatement was sought after close of evidence and after presentation of closing arguments. (GORDON and PALMER, concurring.)

Citimortgage, Inc. v. Cotton

Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
Mortgage Foreclosure
Citation
Case Number: 
2012 IL App (1st) 102438
Decision Date: 
Tuesday, August 28, 2012
District: 
1st Dist.
Division/County: 
Cook Co., 2d Div.
Holding: 
Reversed and remanded.
Justice: 
CUNNINGHAM
Homeowner established evidence, by his counteraffidavit raising factual conflicts with bank's affidavits, sufficient to warrant evidentiary hearing as to whether bank failed to conduct due inquiry to ascertain his whereabouts. Bank failed to attempt to serve homeowner at his place of employment, and failed to contact his attorney, although Bank knew his employment address and his attorney's contact information. Thus, hearing was required as to whether service of foreclosure complaint by publication should be allowed. (CONNORS and HARRIS, concurring.)