Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP | USA | 15 Jan 2016
A recent amendment to the Illinois Mechanics Lien Act that permits owners, lenders and other lien claimants to substitute a bond in lieu of the real property itself is a powerful new tool for selling or refinancing a property that is subject to a disputed mechanics lien claim. However, a 175% bond requirement and concerns over accruing interest and attorneys' fee provisions will likely make......
Ropes & Gray LLP | USA | 15 Apr 2015
An Illinois state court recently held that directors of Motorola Mobility's board did not violate their fiduciary duties to stockholders in selling the company to Google in a single-bidder sale process. The Illinois court applied and interpreted Delaware law, and the decision affirmed a basic principle of Delaware case law that there is no single, mandated way to conduct a sale process.
Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP | USA | 10 Jun 2013
Illinois law was already more favourable to contractors and subcontractors than that of most other states, but the Illinois legislature recently gave them a greater edge against lenders in failed construction projects. Contractors which are unpaid on a project now have priority on the value of the entire improvement – even the value paid for by the lender – and are not limited to the value......
Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP | USA | 3 May 2013
The US District Court for the Central District of Illinois recently overturned a Bankruptcy Court decision, providing real estate mortgage lenders with certainty that a mortgage encumbering Illinois real estate need not explicitly state the interest rate and the maturity date on its face in order to provide constructive notice under Illinois law. A statutory amendment has since been made to......
Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP | USA | 6 Aug 2010
Two recent decisions confirm that under Illinois law, a mortgagee has the right to be placed in possession of a mortgage property prior to entry of a judgment of foreclosure where it can show that the mortgage authorises possession and is likely to prevail on a final hearing, and that the mortgagor has not established any good cause to remain in possession of the property.