Posts Tagged ‘Daniel R. Robinson’

Don’t Forget About the Commercial Auctioneer Option

Tuesday, June 3rd, 2014

por_Robinson_Daniel_RAuthor: Daniel R. Robinson (bio)

Phone: 812.452.3564

Email: [email protected]

In an economic commentary prepared by Thomas J. Fitzpatrick IV and Stephan Whitaker for the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, it was projected that in weak economic markets lenders may be better off not taking properties into REO in the first place.  This conclusion, of course, was due in large part to the carrying costs associated with REO properties, which include keeping the property secure, complying with local housing codes, paying property taxes, marketing the property for sale, and so on.  Often, REO properties are also vacant which presents another set of challenges for local communities.  (more…)

Your Customer Just Filed Bankruptcy, Now What?

Tuesday, April 8th, 2014

por_Robinson_Daniel_RAuthor: Daniel R. Robinson (bio)

Phone: 812.452.3564

Email: [email protected]

Time to write off the entire debt and move on, right?  Not so fast!

One common misconception I hear frequently is that all bankruptcy filings automatically mean no payment.  While this is certainly the case in some instances, it is not always true.    (more…)

Remember to Record or Face Potentially Devastating Consequences

Tuesday, March 11th, 2014

por_Robinson_Daniel_RAuthor: Daniel R. Robinson (bio)

Phone: 812.452.3564

Email: [email protected]

The Indiana Court of Appeals recently re-affirmed the old adage “first in time is first in right” in a case involving priority between a land sale buyer and a mortgagee.  In its decision, the Court ultimately concluded that although a land sale contract was signed nearly five years before a mortgage on the same property was signed, the mortgage nevertheless had priority over the land sale contract since it was recorded first and there was no evidence the mortgagee had actual notice of the land sale contract.  Unfortunately, for the contract buyer, this meant his interest in the real estate was subordinate to the mortgage holder—a devastating result given that the property was in foreclosure and in all likelihood lacked sufficient equity to satisfy both liens. (more…)

What is Piercing the Corporate Veil?

Thursday, January 30th, 2014

por_Robinson_Daniel_RAuthor: Daniel R. Robinson (bio)

Phone: 812.452.3564

Email: [email protected]

Generally, owners of a corporation (shareholders) will not be personally liable for the acts or obligations of the corporation except to the extent of their investment or where they otherwise agreed to guarantee the corporation’s obligations.  The same typically holds true for officers and directors.  (more…)

Buyer Beware—Even in Asset Sales!

Thursday, September 5th, 2013

Business owners looking to expand their business will often contemplate purchasing the assets or stock of a related company.  Conventional wisdom dictates that asset sales are generally more preferable for the buyer due to the fact that the buyer is seemingly not assuming any of the seller’s liabilities.  (more…)

Should Delinquent Real Estate Taxes Be Paid Prior to a Sheriff’s Sale?

Thursday, August 1st, 2013

In Indiana, not only should delinquent real estate taxes be paid prior to the date of a sheriff’s sale, it is a requirement.  Under Indiana’s current mortgage foreclosure statute, before the date of a sheriff’s sale the party that filed the praecipe to initiate the sale is required to pay all delinquent property taxes, special assessments, penalties, and interest due and owing on the property.  (more…)

Determining Bid Strategy for an Indiana Sheriff’s Sale

Thursday, March 14th, 2013

The issue of bid strategy inevitably comes up prior to a sheriff’s sale.  Unfortunately, from the perspective of the lender/judgment holder, there is no one-size-fits-all approach in Indiana.  With each sale, there are a number of factors which must be considered.  (more…)

Protecting Your Employees: The Indiana Workplace Violence Restraining Order

Thursday, September 29th, 2011

Do you have employees who have been the subject of unlawful violence or credible threats of violence while at work—possibly from former employees or others?  If so, Indiana law allows you as the employer to apply for an order—called a workplace violence restraining order—on behalf of the employee prohibiting the abuser from any further acts of unlawful violence or credible threats of violence against the victim and his or her family.  The order may also prohibit the abuser from approaching the victim’s place of work, home, school, or other specified location.

Generally, after an act of unlawful violence or credible threat of violence is made against an employee, the employer may immediately apply for and be granted a temporary restraining order which is effective for a maximum of 15 days.  Prior to the expiration of this 15-day period, the court will also conduct a hearing at which time it may issue a permanent restraining order effective for a period of 3 years.  As opposed other types of restraining orders, the Indiana Workplace Violence Restraining Order is a particularly useful for employers as it allows the employer to obtain an order on behalf of an employee and it applies to specific property and locations, not just people.

If you have any questions about Indiana Workplace Violence Restraining Orders, please contact Dan Robinson or one of the other Manufacturing or Distribution attorneys at Bamberger.

Author: Daniel R. Robinson (bio)
Phone: 812.452.3564
Email: [email protected]

Court Rules that Guarantor Not Released From Liability Because of Integration Clause and Lenders Have No Duty to Advise Prospective Borrowers to Obtain Counsel

Tuesday, August 30th, 2011

In a recent decision, the Indiana Court of Appeals held that an integration clause contained in a guaranty of one loan did not release the guarantor from his liability of a separate loan.  The Court also held that absent special circumstances, a financial institution is not required to advise a client to seek legal counsel in connection with a commercial transaction. (more…)

New Changes to Indiana Foreclosure Law

Tuesday, July 20th, 2010

New changes to Indiana’s foreclosure law took effect July 1, 2010.  Some of the more notable changes are as follows.

1)      Pre-suit Foreclosure Notice.  Under the new law, the 30-day pre-suit foreclosure notice (which was previously required to be sent in all foreclosure cases), is now only required in cases involving the debtor’s primary residence.  The new law serves to clarify an ambiguity under prior law, which should help to reduce costs and delays in commercial foreclosure actions while still protecting consumers at risk of losing their homes. (more…)