Receivers & Mortgagees-In-Possession

One of the first steps commercial lenders take to protect their interests in defaulting loans is to take possession of the property, either through the appointment of a receiver or as a mortgagee-in-possession. Fox Swibel’s attorneys have the breadth and depth of experience to assist receivers and lenders (as mortgagees-in-possession) throughout the life cycle of a commercial foreclosure action.

Whether it is drafting the motion to appoint the receiver, filing the final receiver’s report, or advising on all things in between, Fox Swibel has the legal expertise and practical experience to effectively counsel the receiver (or lender) as it manages the property and assets.

Our attorneys routinely counsel lenders and receivers of commercial real estate and industrial properties in the negotiation and litigation of:

  • The appointment of the receiver or mortgagee-in-possession;
  • Mechanic lien claims;
  • Lease disputes and eviction proceedings;
  • Construction contracts;
  • Building code or other administrative hearings;
  • Receiver funding certificates, including obtaining bids and drafting agreements;
  • Utility contracts, including communicating with utility companies regarding continuing service; and
  • The receiver’s sale of the property in lieu of a traditional judicial sale, including engaging a third-party real estate broker, negotiating the deal, and drafting the purchase and sale documents.
Representative Matters
  • John Hancock Life Insurance Company v. Naples Holmes Road Venture, LLC, et al., Case No. 09 CH 2168 (16th Judicial Circuit, Kane County, Illinois). The foreclosure involved a 134,415 square foot commercial development in Elgin, Illinois.
  • U.S. Bank N.A. v. Newport-GBZ, LLC, Case No. 13 CH 1350 (Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois). The foreclosure involved three commercial centers located in Burbank, Glen Ellyn, and Lake Zurich, Illinois.
  • RBS Citizens, National Association v. Stonegate Commons, LLC, et al., Case No. 09 CH 2320 (22nd Judicial Circuit, McHenry County, Illinois). The foreclosure involved a 10,440 square foot shopping center with seven individual units located in Algonquin, Illinois.
  • Harris N.A. v. Yannis Real Estate, LLC, et al., Case No. 10 CH 15404 (Circuit Court of Cook County). The foreclosure involved a 10,700 square foot restaurant in Arlington Heights, Illinois.
  • Oxford Bank & Trust v. Oxford Bank & Trust, as Trustee Under Trust Agreement #1222, et al., Case No. 11 CH 4925 (18th Judicial Circuit, DuPage County, Illinois). The foreclosure involved a gas station located in Lisle, Illinois.
  • Bank of America, N.A. v. 108 N. State Retail, LLC (Block 37 Litigation), Case No. 09 CH 39930. The foreclosure involved a 285,000 square foot retail development in Chicago, Illinois.
  • Lorig Construction Company v. Shelbourne North Water Street, Case No. 10 CH 27970 (Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois). The foreclosure involved 2.18 acres of vacant land that was intended for use as the Chicago Spire building.
  • U.S. Bank N.A. v. Discovery Center Holdings, LLC, Case No. 14 CH 00544 (Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois). The foreclosure included a three-story, multi-suite commercial office complex comprised of three buildings that are each 45,000 square feet.
  • Bank of America, N.A. v. CE Oak Brook Funding Company, Inc., et al., Case No. 14 CH 2162 (18th Judicial Circuit, DuPage County, Illinois). The foreclosure involved a 58,000 square foot, three-story office building and a parking garage with 252 spaces in Oak Brook, Illinois.
  • BMO Harris Bank, N.A., v. Bruce A. Wiercioch, et al., Case No. 12 CH 451 (22nd Judicial Circuit, McHenry County, Illinois). The foreclosure included three properties in Algonquin, Illinois: a 10,000 square foot, one-story office building and two(2) 16,000 square foot, two-story office buildings.
  • Harris N.A. v. 4744-46 Rice, L.L.C., et al., Case No. 10 CH 19821 (Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois). The foreclosure involved a 30,000 square foot, unfinished two-story industrial building in Chicago, Illinois.
  • Citibank, N.A. v. Springhill Gateway, LLC, et al., Case No. 10 CH 5007 (16th Judicial Circuit, Kane County, Illinois). The foreclosure involved a 59,000 square foot retail building, sub-divided into seven retail spaces, in West Dundee, Illinois.
  • U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee v. Remington Boulevard, LLC, et al., Case No. 11 CH 2644 (12th Judicial Circuit, Will County, Illinois). The foreclosure involved a 47,000 square foot industrial building, featuring nine suites, in Bolingbrook, Illinois.
  • CMLT 2008 LSI Office vs. NNN Church Street Office Center, LLC et al., Case No. 12 CH 39357 (Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois). The foreclosure included two properties. The first property was a nine-story, 152,012 square foot multi-suite office building in Evanston, Illinois’ business district. The second property was a four-story, 306-space parking garage with 118,482 square feet of parking adjacent to the office building.
  • Wells Fargo Bank v. Waterstone Place III, LLC, et al., Case No. 10 CH 2075 (19th Judicial Circuit, Lake County, Illinois). The foreclosure involved a 20,000 square foot retail building in Third Lake, Illinois.
  • Bank of America, N.A. v.1200 Internationale Associates, LLC, Case No. 09 CH 4855 (18th Judicial Circuit, DuPage County, Illinois). The foreclosure involved a 30,000 square foot office building in Woodridge, Illinois.