Opposition to Motion for Appointment of Receiver
In Home Life Insurance Co. v. American National Bank & Trust Co., 777 F. Supp. 629 (N.D. Ill. 1991), the defendant argued that there was good cause for not appointing a receiver because there was no more qualified manager for the property than the current manager and negotiations with prospective tenants would be jeopardized by the appointment of a receiver.
The district court rejected that argument, stating that "the qualifications of current property management are not an important consideration under the Act when the property is in default." Home Life, 777 F. Supp. at 632.
"Such a requirement would be tantamount to shifting the burden of showing good cause onto the mortgagee." Home Life, 777 F. Supp. at 632, citing Travelers, 200 Ill. App. 3d at 144.
In Home Life. defendants contended that because they had made an objection to plaintiff's motion for the appointment of a receiver, they were entitled to an evidentiary hearing under the Act.
The district court disagreed, noting that a hearing had already been held and defendants had been given an opportunity to show good cause. Home Life, 777 F. Supp. at 633.
The court further noted that it had found that defendants failed to establish good cause during that hearing and in their briefs and concluded that "a further evidentiary hearing" "would only serve to delay the inevitable resolution of plaintiff's motion." Home Life, 777 F. Supp. at 633.