Advertisement

May 19, 2013

Illinois Mortgages Subject to Avoidance In Bankruptcy Absent Strict Adherence to Illinois Mortgage Statute: Finance, Insolvency & Restructuring Alert

The United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of Illinois recently held that an Illinois mortgage is subject to avoidance in bankruptcy pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 544(a)(3) unless the mortgage contains among other things, (i) the amount of the debt, (ii) the maturity date of the debt, and (iii) the underlying interest rate. Richardson v. The Gifford State Bank (In re Crane), Adv. Pro. No. 11-9067 (Bankr. C.D. Ill.).

In In re Crane, a secured lender obtained mortgages on two parcels of real estate located in Illinois and owned by the debtors, a husband and wife. The mortgages were properly executed and recorded in the county recording office. After the debtors jointly filed for relief under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code, the Chapter 7 trustee commenced an adversary proceeding against the secured lender alleging that the mortgages were defective and subject to avoidance under 11 U.S.C. § 544(a)(3) because the mortgages failed to state the interest rate and maturity date in violation of 765 ILCS 5/11. According to the trustee, although the mortgages were effective between the debtors and the secured lender, the mortgages were deficient due to their failure to provide constructive notice to subsequent bona fide purchasers. The secured lender, in turn, asserted that although the mortgages were technically deficient, they were in substantial compliance with Illinois law.

In an opinion issued on Feb. 29, 2012 , the bankruptcy court explained that as of the commencement of the bankruptcy case, the trustee was granted the hypothetical status, rights and powers of a bona fide purchaser of real property who has perfected the transfer of real property from the debtor at the time of the bankruptcy filing. The bankruptcy court, citing to and relying on In re Berg, 387 B.R. 524 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 2008) and In re Shara Manning Properties, 2010 Bankr. LEXIS 3688 (Bankr. C.D. Ill. 2010), noted that the trustee, standing in the shoes of a bona fide purchaser, did not have constructive notice of the mortgages because they failed to contain the maturity date and the interest rate of the underlying debt. The bankruptcy court further explained that the provisions of 765 ILCS 5/11 are not permissive; rather, they are required in order to provide constructive notice of a mortgage. As such, the mortgages were subject to avoidance by the trustee because they failed to provide constructive notice to a bona fide purchaser, and thus the trustee under 11 U.S.C. § 544(a)(3).

The decision in In re Crane serves as yet another reminder to secured lenders to strictly comply with the statutory requirements under Illinois or other applicable state law. It is imperative that mortgage lenders examine 765 ILCS 5/11 and other applicable law in Illinois when documenting a mortgage loan. In addition, mortgage lenders should attempt to correct defects in their existing Illinois mortgage as part of any forbearance agreement and even consider attempting to correct such defects by amending current mortgages.

© 2013 BARNES & THORNBURG LLP

About the Author

Partner

John T. Gregg is a partner in the Chicago and Grand Rapids, Michigan offices of Barnes & Thornburg LLP. Mr. Gregg focuses on corporate restructuring, bankruptcy, and insolvency law.

He has experience representing debtors, lenders, committees, trustees, asset purchasers, lessors, and other parties in interest in some of the country’s largest and most complex restructuring matters.

Mr. Gregg serves as the co-chairperson of the Bankruptcy Committee for the Real Property Law Section of the Michigan State Bar and is also a member of the American Bankruptcy Institute...

616-742-3945

About the Author

Partner

Patrick E. Mears is a partner in the Grand Rapids, Michigan office of Barnes & Thornburg LLP and chair of the firm's Finance, Insolvency and Restructuring Department. Mr. Mears concentrates his practice in insolvency, workouts and restructurings, commercial finance, securitizations, and creditors’ rights. He represents financial institutions as individual creditors and as members of loan syndicates in matters throughout the country. Although his primary practice is representing financial institutions as secured and unsecured creditors, he also represents debtors and creditors...

616-742-3936

Contributors

Partner

Michael Campbell is a partner in the Grand Rapids, Michigan office of Barnes & Thornburg LLP where he is a member of the Corporate Department. Mr. Campbell concentrates his practice in the areas of commercial and real estate financing, including commercial loan documentation, real estate and construction lending and tax exempt financing. He also represents clients in mergers and acquisition and general corporate matters.

616-742-3975

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.