Blackhawk Production Credit Ass'n v. Bay

4 Citing cases

  1. In re Kress Road Partnership

    134 B.R. 309 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1991)   Cited 2 times

    Though the Mortgage Note names . . . Callaghan and Ross individually, together with the Trustee as "Makers," the Mortgage Note itself shows that only the Trustee signed the Mortgage Note. Under Illinois law, only the party signing a note is considered the "maker." See, e.g., Midwest Bank Trust Co. v. Roderick, 132 Ill. App.3d 463, [87 Ill.Dec. 334] 476 N.E.2d 1326 (1st Dist. 1985); Alton Banking Trust Co. v. Sweeney, 135 Ill. App.3d 96, [89 Ill.Dec. 926] 481 N.E.2d 769 (5th Dist. 1985); Blackhawk Production Credit Assn. v. Bay, 69 Ill. App.3d 239, [25 Ill.Dec. 726] 387 N.E.2d 382 (2d Dist. 1979). (September Opinion 134 B.R. at 308 n. 8). Kress Road also attempts to support its allegation that the loan was made to Callaghan and Ross individually with a statement from First Federal's Vice President, John Hecht, in which he refers to the loan as having been made to Callaghan and Ross. (Kress Road's Motion For Reconsideration at 3; Complaint, Affidavit of John Hecht, Ex. G). Mr. Hecht's characterization of the loan is of no consequence in light of the court's determination in the September Opinion that the loan was made to CT T, not Callaghan and Ross individually.

  2. Orthodontic Centers of Illinois, Inc. v. Michaels

    461 F. Supp. 2d 655 (N.D. Ill. 2006)   Cited 3 times

    While Centers' accounting records do not expressly state what portion of those payments was allocated to the Notes and to other debts she owed (M. St. Ex. G ¶ 7), both sides have submitted arguments on the current motions as to how those payments were or should have been allocated toward the Notes. In cases such as this, where allocation of payments is disputed with no clear direction from the parties, Illinois law has prescribed certain presumptions, but in the final analysis it will be for the factfinder to decide the "just and equitable apportionment of payments" (Blackhawk Prod. Credit Ass'n v. Bay, 69 Ill.App.3d 239, 245-46, 387 N.E.2d 382, 387 (2d Dist. 1979)). According to Michaels, Centers was responsible for making payments on the Notes out of her account — an account that was managed by Centers — so long as there were sufficient funds in the account to make the payments (M. St. Ex. B at 5:2-15, 86:1-4).

  3. In re Kress Road Partnership.

    134 B.R. 292 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1991)   Cited 6 times
    Finding that there were no facts alleged that the trustee knew, or had reason to know, that a general partner of a limited partnership, which was the beneficiary of the trust, did not have the authority to act for the beneficiary

    Though the Mortgage Note names Callaghan Ross Financial Corporation and Callaghan and Ross individually together with the Trustee as "Makers", the Mortgage Note itself shows that only the Trustee signed the Mortgage Note. Under Illinois law, only the party signing a note is considered the "maker." See, e.g., Midwest Bank Trust Co. v. Roderick, 132 Ill.App.3d 463, 87 Ill.Dec. 334, 476 N.E.2d 1326 (1st Dist. 1985); Alton Banking Trust Co. v. Sweeney, 135 Ill.App.3d 96, 89 Ill.Dec. 926, 481 N.E.2d 769 (5th Dist. 1985); Blackhawk Production Credit Assn. v. Bay, 69 Ill.App.3d 239, 25 Ill.Dec. 726, 387 N.E.2d 382 (2d Dist. 1979). First Federal deposited the sum of $596,114 into Escrow 50609 at CT T to cover Kress Road's construction draws.

  4. In re Kress Road Partnership

    134 B.R. 301 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1991)   Cited 3 times

    Though the Mortgage Note names Callaghan Ross Financial Corporation and Callaghan and Ross individually together with the Trustee as "Makers", the Mortgage Note itself shows that only the Trustee signed the Mortgage Note. Under Illinois law, only the party signing a note is considered the "maker." See, e.g., Midwest Bank Trust Co. v. Roderick, 132 Ill. App.3d 463, 87 Ill.Dec. 334, 476 N.E.2d 1326 (1st Dist. 1985); Alton Banking Trust Co. v. Sweeney, 135 Ill. App.3d 96, 89 Ill.Dec. 926, 481 N.E.2d 769 (5th Dist. 1985); Blackhawk Production Credit Assn. v. Bay, 69 Ill. App.3d 239, 25 Ill.Dec. 726, 387 N.E.2d 382 (2d Dist. 1979). The Mortgage Note is further secured by a Guarantee and Security Agreement executed by CRDC. (Complaint, Ex. E). It is not an uncommon practice for a lender to secure a separate guarantee of a general partner. Though one would hope that such documents would have been more carefully attended to, there is nothing within any of the questioned documents that would invalidate either the Mortgage Note or the Mortgage.