Foreclosed Homes in Illinois

First it needs to be stated that no one has a crystal ball which predicts the future. These thoughts are just opinions and should be taken as such not as legal or tax advice. We will try to show the political positions of the countries that are not in favor of the tax haven offshore jurisdictions and the position of the tax haven countries. The countries most outspoken against offshore banking and offshore corporations are Australia, UK and USA.

Today there is a great outcry from these and other countries about the tax saving benefits afforded to citizens of certain countries by going offshore. These countries claim that their constituents are cheating them out of billions of dollars of taxes by going offshore. The offshore jurisdictions that are considered the tax havens say that is a nice allegation but we are not your collection agency and do not ask us to change our bank and corporate privacy laws because your constituents do not want to pay taxes, this is your problem not ours. The actual amount of taxes that are avoided unlawfully is a figure that one can only take a guess at. Many people set up offshore structures to do business outside of their home country and are not in violation of any laws the way they conduct their business affairs. Many people live in other countries and need to own offshore bank accounts, offshore corporations, offshore real estate, etc. Many people use offshore privacy to protect themselves from identity theft, kidnapping, blackmail, and possible extortion.

Let me use an analogy to make a point. In Latin America there is an organization of five states called Mercosur. Mercosur consists of Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Venezuela, and Uruguay. Mercosur also has associate members which are as follows: Chile, Bolivia, Peru, Columbia and Ecuador. The Mercosur countries engage in free trade and easy border controls with no passports, just national identity cards for border crossings. Mercosur recently issued a statement that they would in the future strive to resist any further attempts to get them to spend more resources on narcotics enforcement that stems from the UN. The UN says its member countries must enact certain kinds of laws to control narcotics and states these laws and insists on enforcement policies. The Mercosur spokesperson stated that this was an irrational policy since it has not worked for over a quarter of a century and it was severely draining the resources of their countries. Essentially they said they were sick and tired of the United States which is the nation driving these policies through the UN, making their problems, the problems of other countries and they were going to collectively attempt to legalize narcotics in their own nations to free themselves from this heavy burden of narcotics enforcement. This has already begun to happen in Bolivia, Paraguay, Argentina and Venezuela with the abundant legal availability of cocoa leaf. The cocoa leaf has cocaine alkaloids (real cocaine) and is commonly used as a chew like chewing tobacco leaf or made into tea leaves. Street cocaine is perhaps 30 times as potent and is diluted with harmful substances like turpentine, ether, etc. Cocoa leaf is a natural plant product used for centuries as a stimulant by people living in the high altitudes of Bolivia, farm workers etc. One can now see coca tea being sold freely on the internet but I would strongly advice you not to order any because you may get charged with narcotics importation, seriously because it can be lab tested to contain cocaine. So my point is a lot of countries have said ok enough is enough when it comes to narcotics. It is not working leave us alone, take care of your own problem. So Mercosur countries are now worrying about their own problems more and less about the narcotics issues in the USA and other nations. I think you will see more of the same type of thinking when it comes to offshore banking, offshore corporations, offshore foundations, offshore stock brokerage accounts etc.

Offshore jurisdictions have to go through all sorts of compliance that is not needed in say the USA or the UK. One offshore formation agent went to the USA and was able to open eight USA bank accounts in one day. In Panama a bank account can take five days after you collect and submit the reference letters and documents. In the USA and UK no bank reference letters are required to open a bank account, neither are any professional references required. In the USA and UK they do enforce money laundering protective measures strictly. One can buy USA corporations or UK corporations without any of the due diligence requirements that are required from offshore jurisdictions. So the playing field is not exactly level yet these countries are screaming for more controls not on themselves but on other countries. It seems that the offshore jurisdictions will scream enough is enough if any further controls are imposed on them and resist them. Of course one wonders what further controls they could come up with that they haven’t already imposed.

Let’s look at history a little to see how things deteriorated in the past regarding offshore privacy and offshore banking. Most of the older offshore tax havens are also tourist destinations such as Cayman Islands, Nassau, Bermuda, Grenada, Belize etc. These countries usually have little if any natural resources and need to bring in everything they consume. While some of them avoid income taxes instead they impose taxes on goods imported. These countries got heavily involved in tourism as a way to keep their economies moving. A cruise ship docking at these ports usually carries 2500 people. Each person probably spends an average of $100 a day when in this ports buying t-shirts, duty free liquor, tobacco, jewelry etc. many spend a good deal more. That is $250,000 per cruise ship. These jurisdictions get from 3 ships per week, to 40 ships per week docking there. The money from the cruise ships exceeds what would be earned from their previous offshore banking and incorporation activities. Remember a bank that controls hundreds of millions of dollars of deposits can only have 50 or so employees. A thriving cruise ship port can have thousands of employees working in the shops, restaurants, as tour guides, taxi drivers etc. So more jobs are at stake in the tourism business. We also have to take into account the resorts these countries have which create even more jobs and generate revenue in the form of a hotel room tax built into the rates. These countries also charge a head tax on every person coming into their country. Bottom line is there is much more money in the tourism business than there is the offshore business for the government of these jurisdictions. The governments of these countries don’t make much off of a bank account for instance, actually nothing. They have no income or capital gains tax. The offshore corporations would pay a few hundred dollars a year in taxes but that was it. The banks would pay a few thousand dollars a year for their licenses. So these countries sold out on offshore privacy to protect their tourism. If they did not do so the countries allowing tax free importation from these countries of tourist bought items might go away. Tourists returning from these countries by ship or air might find themselves stuck in long lines while they are searched and interrogated by authorities of various affected countries which would quickly and seriously discourage tourism to these countries. Other countries like Switzerland, Lichtenstein, and Luxembourg sold out due to pressure from the EU. But now we are seeing a reversal in position regarding the EU, not much of a reversal but at least a sigh of OK enough is enough.

In recent months the USA was exposed by the New York Times Newspaper in a scandal whereby they were monitoring SWIFT wire transactions for some years. SWIFT is a private company that enables banks to communicate with each other securely including sending wire transfers. SWIFT machines require a separate terminal and line so as to make them most secure. The USA served a court order on the SWIFT people in New York to turn over all the data they requested and gag ordered them to not mention what was going on. It went on for two years. This got the EU nations most upset. While they have not actually prosecuted the SWIFT people for violating the banking laws of the various European nations affected, there was serious talk of it. Whether or not obeying a USA court order to violate the banking laws of other nations is a viable defense has never been tested in any court, yet anyway. The EU position on this was they must get the USA to understand their banking laws call for privacy. This of course is not exactly giving ground for more privacy invasive laws which is what we mean by a reversal.

Today the most privacy oriented jurisdiction in the world is Panama. Panama has 400,000 corporations registered there. Panama requires corporation formation agents to be lawyers and their know your client rules are strict and call for criminal penalties if not followed. Panama banks follow tight anti-money laundering laws as well as know your customer laws. Panama does still allow for anonymous bearer share corporations which do not require the entry into any registry of any ownership names or identities. The anonymous bearer share corporations combined with Panama bank secrecy laws make for the best privacy in the world today. Panama foundations are also anonymous with no owners, beneficiaries or protectors names appearing in any registry or database. Panama is also in no tax treaty with any other country and is fairly unique in this regards. Of course one can ask the question if Panama can sustain their practices under pressure from other nations.

First off Panama does follow the FATF (Financial Action Task Force) practices. Secondly Panama does not exactly have a lot of tourism, actually it has quite a small amount of tourism and most of their tourism comes from Latin America not the EU or USA. This means there is no meaningful tourism that can be taken away. Panama is a small country and 15% to 20% of the workforce is employed by the international banks. Panama has 400,000 corporation registered there who each pay $300 in annual corporate taxes. This comes to $120,000,000 dollars and this is for a country of 2.9 million people. Also consider these corporations are paying for resident agents, nominee directors etc. Then we get into Panama Foundations which also collect $300 in annual taxes each year plus nominee council member fees. Panama will and has resisted attempts to compromise banking secrecy and corporate secrecy.

Again let us look towards history to see what we can learn, this time focusing on anonymous bearer share corporations. The issue with anonymous bearer share corporations is that when the international wires are monitored it is impossible to tell who the natural persons are behind the bearer share corporations sending or receiving the wires. The British Virgin Islands used to offer anonymous bearer share corporations. A few years ago they gave in to pressure from the UK and stopped issuing new bearer share corporations but they did make allowances for the existing bearer share corporations to remain anonymous for 10 years. After that time they would need to dissolve or operate in a non-anonymous mode. If we want to look on the dark side we can consider Panama doing the same if international pressure ever built up sufficiently to force a change. So of course those owning an existing bearer share corporation would be unaffected for ten years and these corporations would probably go up significantly in value on the secondary market. We have absolutely no indications subtle or otherwise that anything is going to change in Panama.

It is also a possibility that some other nations may enter into the bank secrecy arena in the near future and some other nations may return to bank secrecy as well. Only time will tell. Nothing we see gives any inkling of an idea that Panama will reverse on its position of bank and corporate privacy and it appears that things may have already sunk to an all time low and offshore banking and corporate privacy may actually soon start to improve, first with the wire transfer system and later on in other areas.

Ronald Edwards is a researcher, with years of experience in finances and real estate.

When you realize that you have a debt issue going on, you have several options to choose from: do nothing, create a budget, seek credit counseling, get professional debt consolidation help, opt for debt negotiation & settlement help from a specialized company or file for bankruptcy; this last option should always be considered as the last alternative in mind because of the consequences brought upon as result of it.

However, if you are looking to release yourself from debt, you should define your plan towards the following goals: lowering the amount of your debt, getting on a fixed payment plan that is comfortable for you and making sure your credit rating improves as result of this process.

First, you should know the differences between:

- Debt consolidation &
- Debt negotiation and debt settlement

Debt Consolidation and Debt settlement has its advantages and its disadvantages. Nevertheless, they both have one main objective in common, to free the consumer from debt.
Remember, it is very important to completely understand how every step of the process works in order to know which to apply to.

In debt settlement, negotiations take place with the creditors. A debt settlement companys main goal is to convince the creditors to give up a share of the money owed by the consumer.

Here is an example to further clarify this process: lets suppose that a friend of mine, James, borrowed $1600 from me. After a while, when I told him to pay me my money back, he said, “Nancy, I only have $700, would you settle for those $700 upfront and forget about the remaining $900. Occasionally, creditors take these type of offers into consideration because sometimes it is more expensive and time consuming to recover the rest of the money. So, its worth it to stick to what the consumer offers in order to settle the account.

Although at first, this seems like the best of all opportunities, it also has negative consequences:

- It will appear on your credit report for as long as 7 years, as a negotiated and settled debt, so any future creditor will check for this info, and that, could avoid you from getting any future credit or loans
- All future creditors will understand this as a warning that you did not fully pay your past debt.

So the question is, “When should you choose debt consolidation or debt settlement?”

- People that have pending balances with several creditors should choose debt consolidation
- However, if you are in a great amount of debt, do not see any possibility of repaying those accounts off, and taking bankruptcy into consideration, then you should opt for debt settlement.

Check these links to learn more:

http://www.bill-consolidation-and-debt-negotiation.com/consumer-credit-counseling/NJ-New-Jersey/Consumer-Credit-Counseling-NJ-New-Jersey.shtml

http://www.bill-consolidation-and-debt-negotiation.com/consumer-credit-counseling/NY-New-York/Consumer-Credit-Counseling-NY-New-York.shtml

Nancy Smith is a contributing writer to http://www.bill-consolidation-and-debt-negotiation.com and is currently writing some special articles to guide business on how to manage debt and avoid bankruptcy. For Free Debt Settlement Information and Debt Help Consultation, call toll-free 1-877-850-3328.

Arizona Government Agency Reaches Out to Hire Veterans

Arizona Corporation Commission Joins HireVeterans.com

by Gordon Gates

Article 15 of the Arizona Constitution establishes the Arizona Corporation Commission. Only 7 states have constitutionally formed Commissions. Arizona is one of only 13 states with elected Commissioners. In the 37 other states, Commissioners are appointed by either the governor or the legislature.

In most states, the Commission is known as the Public Service Commission or the Public Utility Commission. Arizona’s Commission, however, has responsibilities that go beyond traditional public utilities regulation. These additional roles include facilitating the incorporation of businesses and organizations, securities regulation and railroad/pipeline safety. In kind, the Commission is reaching out to U.S. Veterans to fill internal positions to help manage and administer the agency.

In fact, they have joined HireVeterans.com, a leading job board for U.S. Veterans on the internet. This is part of their overall strategy to fill jobs with returning U.S. Veterans.

The State of Arizona offers even more benefits. Employees enjoy special competitive rates on Auto and Home Insurance from Travelers and Liberty Mutual. Computers from Dell and Gateway. Plus discounts of up to 50% on local and national products and services with our State Employee Discount Program.

Employee Discount Program
Group Auto and Home Insurance
Computer Purchase Program

Organization

In November 2000, the voters of Arizona approved a measure, placed on the ballot by the State Legislature, which expanded the size of the Commission from three to five Commissioners. The measure also changed the term of office from one six-year term to a four-year term with the possibility of reelection to one additional (consecutive) four-year term. The initial terms of the two new seats are for two years. In the case of a vacancy, the Governor appoints a Commissioner to serve until the next general election. The Commissioners choose one member from among themselves to serve as Chairman.

The Commissioners have the ultimate responsibility for final decisions on granting or denying rate adjustments, enforcing safety and public service requirements, and approving securities matters.

Executive Director

The Director of the Commission Staff is the Executive Director. The Executive Director serves at the pleasure of the Commissioners, and is responsible to the Commissioners for the day to day operations of all Divisions. Section 40-105, Arizona Revised Statutes, outlines the powers and duties of the Executive Director’s position.

Divisions

The Commission staff is organized into six Divisions. Each Division is headed by a Director who reports to the Executive Director.

Administration

The Administration Division plans, coordinates and directs the administrative and fiscal activities necessary to support the Commissioners and all Divisions of the Commission. The Division also provides information to the general public and media on all Commission activities.

Hearings

The Hearings Division exercises the Commission’s authority to hold public hearings on matters involving the regulation of public service corporations, the sale of securities and the registration of non-municipal corporations. The Hearings Division is also responsible for the Commission’s Docket Control Section.

Utilities

The Arizona Corporation Commission has jurisdiction over the quality of service and rates charged by public service utilities. By state law, public service utilities are regulated monopolies given the opportunity to earn a fair and reasonable return on their investments. What is fair and reasonable in any particular case has been and always will be open to debate in rate hearings before the Commission. Generally, the Commission tries to balance the customers’ interest in affordable and reliable utility service with the utility’s interest in earning a fair profit.

The Utilities Division makes specific recommendations to the Commissioners to assist them in reaching decisions regarding public utility rates, utility finance and quality of service. The Division is responsible for researching and developing utility issues, providing information and evidence in Commission proceedings dealing with utility applications, and monitoring the quality of utility service, and the rates approved by the Commissioners. Additionally, Division staff inspects gas pipelines for safety, operates a railroad safety program and maintains the official documents of proceedings before the

Commission

All rate changes require approval of the Commission in an Open Meeting. Staff preparation for a major rate hearing begins at the time of utility’s initial filing, and takes approximately four to six months before the hearing takes place. Work efforts between the time of filing and hearing include a review of past Commission actions, a review of documents on file with the Commission, an audit of the books and records of the utility, discussions with utility personnel and other interested parties, formulation of the staff recommendation, an analysis of the impacts of the recommendation, and preparation of written testimony and schedules.

Securities

The Securities Division strives to ensure the integrity of the securities marketplace through investigative actions as well as the registration and/or oversight of securities, securities dealers and brokers, investment advisers and their representatives; to enhance legitimate capital formation; and to minimize the burden and expense of regulatory compliance by legitimate business.

The Division reviews prospective offerings of securities to ascertain that full and fair disclosure is made to potential securities investors and that the terms of offerings are not inherently fraudulent.

Certain securities dealers, salespersons, investment advisers, and investment adviser representatives are required to register with the Division. The Division reviews these applications and monitors the conduct of investment advisers, dealers and salespersons; investigates possible violations; and when the evidence warrants, initiates administrative or civil actions, or refers cases for criminal prosecution.

Corporations

The Corporations Division approves for filing all articles of incorporation for Arizona businesses; all articles of organization for limited liability companies; grants authority to foreign corporations to transact business in this state; propounds interrogatories when necessary to determine a company’s lawful purpose; and revokes the corporate charters of those corporations which choose to not comply with Arizona law. The Division collects from every corporation an annual report which reflects its current status, business, and financial condition; maintains this information in a format conducive to public access; responds to public questions concerning Arizona businesses and corporation law; and responds to the needs of the business sector by disseminating whatever information is mission-critical to them in the most expedient and cost-effective manner possible.

Any significant changes to Articles of Incorporation or Articles of Organization for Limited Liability Companies in the form of amendments, mergers, consolidations, dissolutions or withdrawals are also filed with the Division. All filings are public record and available for inspection.

Legal

The Legal Division provides legal assistance, advice and representation to the Commissioners and each Division of the Corporation Commission except the Securities Division. Matters handled by the Legal Division fall into five general categories: Commission dockets, Federal regulatory dockets, litigation, other administrative matters and special projects.

Most of the Division’s resources are devoted to Commission hearings. Major rate cases, such as those involving firms like the Arizona Public Service Company and Qwest, where tens of millions of dollars in potential rate increases are at stake, take several months to prepare and require close coordination with the Commissioners, staff and professional consultants.

Information Technology

The mission of the Information Technology (IT) Division is to provide accurate, efficient and timely technology design, development, implementation, communications and maintenance support services to the agency and its respective divisions in support of their missions and objectives.

The State of Arizona is an Equal Opportunity Employer. Pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, the State will make reasonable accommodation(s) during the employment process.

Chairman Mike Gleason

Mike Gleason was born in Iowa, where he lived on a farm before joining the United States Navy during World War II. After his discharge from the Navy in 1947, he enrolled at Iowa State College, where he earned a Bachelor of Science in forestry in 1950. In 1951, he received a Masters Degree in range management from Texas A&M, and two years later, Gleason was awarded a PhD in plant physiology from Iowa State.

Gleason’s private-sector experience in applied agricultural sciences spans nearly 40 years of employment with the Rockefeller Foundation, Pacific Oilseeds, Monsanto and Cargill, Inc. During this period, his duties required that he reside in Mexico, and later, France. Other responsibilities took Gleason on frequent travels throughout the world, including Peru, Kenya, Bangladesh, Senegal, Zaire, the Ivory Coast, Nigeria and Pakistan.

Employee Benefits and Work/Life Options

The state of Arizona offers a variety of careers and benefits for state employees. If you want challenging work, friendly co-workers, flexible work options, and if health benefits and retirement programs are important to you, consider your options at the state of Arizona.

We are committed to offering a work environment that helps state employees achieve greater success at work and at home. Employees may be able to use the following options to help manage responsibilities at home and at work.

- Flexibility
- Health and Well-Being
- Time off
- Caring for Dependents
- Financial Support
- Career
- Retirement - Organization Support
- Community Involvement

————————————————-
Official Web Sites

Apply to Jobs for Arizona Corporate Commission on HireVeterans.com
http://www.hireveterans.com/view.php?company_id=338

Human Resources Department - Arizona Government
http://www.hr.state.az.us

Employment Site for Arizona Corporate Commission
https://secure.azstatejobs.gov/pljb/azgovjobs/mainjb/applicant/index.jsp

Arizona Corporate Commission Site
http://www.azcc.gov
————————————————-

Arizona Corporation Commission
Commissioners Wing
1200 W. Washington - 2nd Floor
Phoenix, Arizona 85007
Phone: 602.542.3682

Gordon Gates is a recruiting consultant at http://HireVeterans.com.

Have you got a case? Do you know when you need a personal injury attorney?

Most people assume you only need a personal injury attorney for a auto accident. Clearly, when you have an auto accident that results in an injury to yourself caused by others then hiring a personal injury attorney would be prudent, but there are many instances when a personal injury attorney may be of use to you for all sorts of accidents caused by others.

The key question when assessing whether you need to hire an attorney regarding a claim is “has there been negligence caused by another?” If there has been no negligence, intentional or otherwise, then there can be no claim. For instance, as you walk down the sidewalk your toe catches on a loose paving slab. You fall and break your wrist. In this instance the persons or authority charged with maintaining the sidewalk is negligent for letting the sidewalk fall into dangerous disrepair. If, however on your walk about town, you trip on a sidewalk for no reason other than your own clumsiness and break your wrist only you are responsible. The side walk is in good working order only you are negligent for not taking more care.

There are many instances when a personal injury claim may be made, not only car accidents and slips on sidewalks. Workplace accidents, construction accidents, fires, floods, poisoning, drug overdoses, animal bites, being robbed or mugged, medical malpractice, airplane/bus/train accidents and even legal malpractice may entitle you to a personal injury claim.

Even accidents you may have had in the past may be worth assessing with a personal injury attorney. Often when you consider who was at fault for your accident you may point the finger of suspicion in one direction, but a well chosen personal injury attorney may be able to highlight several parties at fault for the incident.

So how do you choose a personal injury attorney to represent you? Well, first off select a few from your local area to interview over the telephone. Ask each how many personal injury cases they have tried in front of a jury, the type of experts they have had to hire for clients, whether they have handled cases similar to yours and what results did they achieve, whether they willing to advance the expense of the litigation and what percentage of their income is derived from personal injury cases. Answers to these questions should help you to make a good choice of attorney from your selection.

Ian Walker writes for http://www.sflorida-personalinjuryattorney.com.

Do you know what “proceedings supplemental” are? If you are in the business of collecting judgments in Indiana, and from time to time virtually all secured lenders are, then the June 27, 2007 opinion by the Indiana Supreme Court in Rose v. Mercantile National Bank, 2007 Ind. LEXIS 471 provides a great primer on the subject.

Facts of Rose. Plaintiffs sued an S-Corp, and the trial court entered judgment against S-Corp for $159,581. During the litigation, the owners of S-Corp sold the company in an asset sale to Corporation I for $475,000. Corporation I then transferred its rights and obligations under the asset-purchase agreement to Corporation II, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Corporation I. After the sale, the owners of S-Corp deposited the sale proceeds into S-Corp’s bank account and, within three days, issued checks to themselves for the entire sale price. The closing occurred approximately one month after the trial court entered judgment for Plaintiffs.

About a year later, presumably because the judgment had not been paid, Plaintiffs moved for proceedings supplemental and brought fraudulent transfer claims against S-Corp, Corporation I, Corporation II, and S-Corp’s owners. Plaintiffs asserted that assets had been transferred out of S-Corp to avoid paying the judgment. During the proceedings supplemental, Plaintiffs sought to amend the complaint to add additional claims and to recover new damages. The result was a new judgment for Plaintiffs for $542,435.49 plus attorney’s fees of $162,730. The Indiana Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s finding that the two owners of S-Corp fraudulently transferred assets, but the Court set aside the new claims for new damages.

Proceedings supplemental generally. Proceedings supplemental are designed to help judgment creditors enforce judgments - for discovering assets and to set aside fraudulent conveyances. Proceedings supplemental are merely the continuation of an original action. Ind. Trial Rule 69(E) generally governs proceedings supplemental, and the motion is made in the court where judgment was rendered. Discovery is permitted, and a hearing must be conducted, after which certain property is to be applied toward the judgment. Id. at 4-5.

Fraudulent transfer. Judgment creditors often use proceedings supplemental to bring fraudulent transfer actions, the purpose of which is to remove “obstacles which prevent the enforcement of the judgment . . . through the levy of execution.” The essence of a fraudulent transfer action is not to attack the transfer or to recover damages. Instead, the action “is to subject property to execution as though it were still in the name of the grantor.” Id at 6-7.

New claims. Unlike Plaintiffs’ fraudulent transfer claims, Plaintiffs also sought new damages from the S-Corp owners by adding a new cause of action under Indiana’s Crime Victims’ Compensation Act, which allows for treble damages and attorney’s fees. The Court said this was a no-no: “Allowing a new claim to be tacked on at this stage would be just as unfitting as opening up any other litigation to add new claims after judgment. Such an approach to collections would lay the groundwork for perpetual motion-a far cry from the timely and efficient system of conflict resolution the nation’s judiciary strives to provide. Proceedings supplemental are appropriate only for actions to enforce and collect existing judgments, not to establish new ones.”

Id. at 7. So, a new claim for new damages, and thus the imposition of a new judgment, should be filed in a new lawsuit. On the other hand, “any action to assist in collection of an original judgment [like a proceeding supplement] must be filed under the same cause number as the original action.” Id.

In addition to addressing the generalities of proceedings supplemental, the Indiana Supreme Court provides clarity for lenders concerning fraudulent transfer actions, which can be appropriately prosecuted in proceedings supplemental or, in other words, in a continuation of the same case and in the same trial court that rendered the judgment. Any new claims or, in other words, actions for separate and distinct damages, however, must be the subject of another lawsuit.

John D. Waller is a partner at the Indianapolis law firm of Wooden & McLaughlin LLP. He publishes the blog Indiana Commercial Foreclosure Law at http://commercialforeclosureblog.typepad.com. John’s phone number is 317-639-6151, and his e-mail address is jwaller@woodmclaw.com.

addthis_pub = ‘articlecity’; addthis_logo = ‘http://www.articlecity.com/images/addthis.png’;addthis_logo_background = ‘ffffff’;addthis_logo_color = ‘000000′;addthis_brand = ‘ArticleCity.com’;addthis_options = ‘email, favorites, delicious, digg, facebook, fark, furl, google, live, myweb, myspace, newsvine, reddit, slashdot, stumbleupon, technorati, twitter, more’;

1041

Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »