Whistling Dixie

This is a long post but it’s worth it.

Guess who’s up to his ears in a commercial foreclosure, lawsuit and a possible sale?

That’s right, the effervescent Carlton Knight.

I recently took a trip to the Clerk of the Circuit Court records division after I discovered new legal proceedings against Mr. Knight.

I love the transparency of the legal system in my neck of the woods.

I’m just giving you the interesting parts. For those of you waiting with baited breath for a bullet point by bullet point outline of the failed summons service attempts, I’m sorry to disappoint you.

The following facts were taken from court records filed earlier this year:

A mortgage loan for $1,120,000 was taken out with Westbank in Hillside, IL by Carlton Knight and Chicago Title Land Trust Company (as successor trustee to NAB Bank) under trust number 2-107-0 on October 3, 2003. The 40 unit commercial property is located at 15144 Dixie Highway in Harvey, Illinois.

On April 19, 2007 a foreclosure suit was filed against Carlton and the above mentioned trust for the unpaid balance of the mortgage, legal fees and court costs by Inland Bank & Trust F/K/A Westbank.

On June 13, 2007 Carlton filed appearance documentation declaring his intent to represent himself (ProSe) and the answer Inland Bank’s initial complaint. His response was that there was “insufficient information with which to admit or deny paragraphs 1-3 of the complaint to foreclosure mortgage and therefore neither admit nor deny those paragraphs but demand strict proof thereof.”

Now here’s where it gets fun.

The newly engaged (and one of People Magazine’s sexiest men of 2005) Mr. Patrick Fitzgerald, jumps into the fray by filing his own answer to the complaint.

Why, might you ask?

It appears the Internal Revenue Service AND the city have an interest in the Dixie Highway property in hopes of satisfying both a tax lien AND a judgment.

So Mr. Fitzgerald representing the United States of America for the Northern District of Illinois stated on June 5, 2007 that a lien was placed on the premises “to secure a tax assessment balance of $379,530.72 as of May 18th 2007.”

Furthermore Mr. Fitzgerald had to raise his pimp hand to the mortgage company and the city by stating:

“The United States of America has insufficient knowledge to form a belief as to the priority between its lien, plaintiff’s mortgage and other liens against the subject premises.”

“The United States of America asserts its right of redemption accorded it under 28 U.S.C. 2410 and applicable state statutes.”

“…Further the United States of America prays that if the premises involved herin are sold free and clear of all liens and encumbrances, save the right of redemption vested in the United States of America by statute, the proceeds derived from said sale to be applied to the payment of the liens of the various parties in this cause…”

I wonder if it just would have been easier to quote Ludacris and just say “move, bitch get out the way.”

How hot is that shit?

But never one to take any type of legal proceedings lying down, Carlton filed a response on October 1, 2007 to the plaintiff’s petition to appoint a receiver.

Pimp hand indeed.


According to answers.com a receiver is a “person appointed by a court or secured creditor to run a company for a short period of time in a manner that will ensure as much debt is paid back to creditors as possible. Their main purpose is to use a company's assets in a way that will most effectively pay back creditors.”


In his response Carlton stated that the “plaintiff wrongfully assumes that rents are being collected and diverted for personal use. However 17 of the 40 units are currently vacant with less than $6,000 collected for September. All of the funds have been used to pay operating expenses (gas, water, waste disposal) and daily maintenance of the property.”

“The appointment of a receiver would only increase the expenses of a struggling property which is currently under a contract for sale, awaiting final approval and has a back up offer as a contingency.”

Whoo doggies!

Not to be one upped, Inland filed yet another suit---this time in the law division of the circuit court last week on November 28th.

Looks like these kids mean business.

Unfortunately the judge is holding the file in his chambers so I can’t get my hot little hands on it so I can give a good read.

But rest assured when I get a chance to read the paperwork, I’ll be sure to give you every factual relevant tidbit.