- We assisted our client, a large, privately-held food distribution business, in negotiating and documenting a $150,000,000 revolving credit facility from a national bank.
- We assisted our client, a technical service and support firm, in negotiating and documenting an $8,000,000 revolving line of credit from a national bank.
- We represented an Illinois bank in amending loan documents to add an additional $1,000,000 facility to existing loans in excess of $12,000,000 made to a diversified metal company with collateral in multiple jurisdictions.
- We represented a national bank in amending loan documents for a $5,000,000 revolving line of credit to a candy company.
Barrington Bank and Trust Company, N.A. v. Broadpeak Collaborative, Inc., Thomas J. Hrinowich, and Anthony S. Martorano Lance C. Ziebell, lead counsel for the Plaintiff
The firm represented the Plaintiff/bank in this case involving a confession of judgment. The firm obtained a confession of judgment against the Defendants within six days of filing the complaint. Thereafter, the firm pursued the judgment debtors/Defendants through supplemental proceedings. Within three months of obtaining judgment, the firm had recovered the entire amount due and owing the Plaintiff/bank, including all court costs, attorney fees, and post-judgment interest.
Northside Community Bank v. Act Realty Arianas / OTGC v. Act Realty
In the Circuit Court of Cook County / in the Circuit Court of DuPage County. Plaintiff, Bank entered a Confession of Judgment against individuals who guaranteed a business loan on behalf of their corporation. Lavelle Law, Ltd. represented a group of shareholders that owned 50% of the company that defaulted on the loan. The Bank obtained judgment against one of Lavelle Law, Ltd.’s clients via a Confession of Judgment clause in the loan documents and froze the client’s assets. Lavelle Law, Ltd. successfully negotiated a settlement with the Bank which allowed Lavelle Law, Ltd.’s client to step into the shoes of the Bank and obtain all the rights and privileges that came with the Bank’s judgment, the settlement also required the Bank assign all of its rights under the Note and Guarantees to Lavelle Law, Ltd.’s client. Lavelle Law, Ltd. then created a new entity which stepped into the shoes of the Bank and pursued remedies against the other 50% shareholder, who had ceased communicating with his fellow shareholders and refused to pay anything towards the judgment amount. After litigating the matter in supplementary proceedings, Lavelle Law, Ltd. was able to force his opponent to give up his 50% share in the company for one dollar in exchange for a release and dismissal of the litigation. Lavelle Law, Ltd.’s clients now enjoy 100% ownership of the company, which owns a multipurpose commercial building that is now fully leased and operating at a profit.
Northside Community Bank v. Hueng Baek and Hyun Baek Lee
In the Circuit Court of Cook County. Lavelle Law, Ltd. represented the Defendants in this matter, in which the Plaintiff obtained a judgment against the Defendants in excess of eleven million dollars ($11,000,000.00) via a confession of judgment clause contained in the applicable loan documents. The Plaintiff Bank then instituted supplementary proceedings and froze all of Lavelle Law, Ltd.’s clients’ bank accounts. Plaintiff also recorded liens on real estate owned by Lavelle Law, Ltd.’s clients and continued to vigorously pursue prosecute collection efforts. Lavelle Law, Ltd. successfully moved to Vacate the Confession of Judgment rendering the Banks’ judgment null and void. Lavelle Law, Ltd. also subsequently had all of the liens and citations against his clients dismissed and released, thereby freeing their clients from an enormous financial burden.
Barrington Bank v. Wojciak et al.
In the Circuit Court of Cook County Lavelle Law, Ltd. successfully obtained a judgment in favor of the bank on a Promissory Note and Guarantees against the Defendants and successfully defended against Motions to Vacate, Motions to Reconsider, and various other delay tactics until Defendant was forced to pay 100% of the amount outstanding plus interest and attorneys’ fees on the judgment amount.