This post was written by Edward V. Walsh III. Brownfield developers and owners of contaminated property contemplating a cleanup should take note of two important guidelines issued by the U.S. EPA. These guidelines recommend early consideration of the use of institutional controls (legal documents such as deed restrictions, restrictive covenants and the like) in planning … Continue Reading
A recent appellate court decision in Illinois emphasizes yet again the need for buyers to include any and all representations and covenants of sellers expressly in the real estate contract – if you expect to be able to rely on them and enforce them against the sellers later. In the case of Siegel Development, LLC … Continue Reading
This post was written by Daniel Slattery and Ann Pille. The United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois has arguably driven the last nail into the coffin of In re Crane, the much criticized decision of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of Illinois. The coffin was already set … Continue Reading
This post was also written by Cynthia Jared. Custom and practice in Illinois with respect to mortgages has been to incorporate the note or other debt instrument by reference, rather than to disclose all of the financial terms of a loan transaction in the mortgage. Then, in April 2012 (as previously reported in the Reed … Continue Reading
Since the In re Crane decision was handed down by the Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of Illinois in April 2012, all eyes in the mortgage banking industry have been focused on the appeal of the decision pending in the U.S. District Court, in the hopes that the widely criticized ruling of the Bankruptcy … Continue Reading
In In re Crane, the Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of Illinois recently held that a mortgage can be avoided in bankruptcy if it fails to include the maturity date and the interest rate of the underlying debt within the mortgage document. The court found that failing to include these loan terms on the … Continue Reading
The City of Chicago has prevailed in the latest round of a "no holds barred" battle with local property owners over the constitutionality of The Chicago Landmarks Ordinance. In a decision dated May 2, 2012 by the Circuit Court of Cook County, the property owners' claims that the Landmarks Ordinance was unconstitutionally vague and violated due process were rejected, and the court upheld the Ordinance. Hanna and Mrowka v. City of Chicago. No. 06 CH 19422. The landowners had previously won a highly favorable ruling at the appellate court level (in 2009), which raised the prospect of the invalidation of the Ordinance (as reported in a previous Reed Smith Client Alert) - a result that would have sent shockwaves through the historic preservation community nationwide. With the case remanded to it for decision, the trial court considered the due process vagueness issue in detail, including as to the clarity of the Ordinance's criteria for landmark status; but it was not persuaded by the property owners' arguments, and found that they did not meet their burden of rebutting the presumption of the constitutionality of the legislation, thus upholding the Ordinance.… Continue Reading
Real estate purchasers whose contract permits the return of the earnest money deposit if financing cannot be obtained must be extremely careful in how this contingency is worded in the purchase contract, or a purchaser may get an unwelcome surprise, and be forced to forfeit the earnest money when financing cannot be obtained. Typically, when … Continue Reading
Chicago's Vacant Building Ordinance, which imposes substantial and unprecedented duties on mortgagees of residential real estate located in the city of Chicago, continues to generate controversy - and lawsuits.… Continue Reading
