In February 2012, 49 state attorneys general, including Nevada’s AG, and the federal government announced a historic joint state-federal settlement with the country’s five largest mortgage servicers:

Foreclosure Problems



•Bank of America


•JPMorgan Chase

•Wells Fargo


This is the largest consumer financial protection settlement in US history.

The agreement settles state and federal investigations finding that the country’s five largest mortgage servicers routinely signed foreclosure related documents outside the presence of a notary public and without really knowing whether the facts they contained were correct.  Both of these practices violate the law.

If you lost your home to foreclosure in Nevada between 2008 and 2011, you have probably already been notified that you may be eligible to participate in Nevada’s settlement with the National Mortgage Settlement Administrator.  THE FINAL DAY TO SUBMIT A CLAIM FORM TO BE ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE PAYMENT IS FRIDAY, JANUARY 18, 2013.

To see if you are eligible, you may visit


The Office of the Comptroller of Currency announced they are close to a $10 billion settlement with 14 banks related to the U.S. government’s efforts to hold lenders responsible for foreclosure abuses.  The announcement comes after just one month of secret talks between regulators and lenders.  Among the lenders included in the negotiations are JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Citigroup, and Ally financial. This tentative agreement is the latest in a series of settlements between regulators, law enforcement officials, and banks in an effort to hold lenders accountable for their role in the 2008 financial crisis and subsequent housing market slump.

The abuses cited include faulty paperwork, excessive fees and/or illegally charged fees, forcing homeowners into costly insurance, miscalculating loan payment amounts, and wrongful evictions.  The proposed settlement came after failed attempts by independent consultants to review the bank’s loan records – efforts which were both costly (approximately $1.5 billion in fees) and time consuming (each individual review taking up to 20 hours to complete).

As part of the proposed settlement, $6 billion would be set aside for relief to current homeowners including reducing principle, refinancing high interest rate mortgages, and donating abandoned homes.  In addition, $3.75 billion would go to individuals who have already lost their homes.  The proposed settlement would also halt a consent order requiring a sweeping review of over four million bank loan files.

In addition to these efforts, federal agencies including the Security and Exchange Commission and the Justice Department continue to pursue these banks for the packaging and sale of troubled mortgage securities that imploded during the financial crisis.



Black & LoBello on AM720 KDWN

Tune in as Black & LoBello offers free legal advice on a wide range of topics

Click here to listen to the Credit Show with Harry Jacobs from Credit Restoration of Nevada on KDWN AM720 from September 28th, 2012 featuring Managing Partner, Tisha Black Chernine, Esq.  Mrs. Black Chernine and Mr. Jacobs discuss responding to collection letters from credit companies (2:14), responding to a dunning letter to repair credit (8:15), how creditors violate the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (12:40) debts resolved by foreclosure (15:32), how banks violate FDIC statutes (18:00), how bankruptcy can affect home loans (21:15), how credit scores are affected by bankruptcy vs. foreclosure (28:40) and defaulting on student loans (31:40).

You can also listen to Mrs. Tisha Black by tuning in to AM720 KDWN’s “Legal Hour,” every Wednesday, from 9 AM to 10 AM.  Listen live on the radio or online.   Feel free to call in with your comments or questions at 702-257-5396.

To listen to past shows, visit our Media page.

Black & LoBello on AM720 KDWN

Tune in as Black & LoBello offers free legal advice on a wide range of topics

Click here to listen to the Legal Hour on KDWN AM720 from September 5th, 2012 in which Managing Partner, Tisha Black Chernine, Esq., hosts special guest and community bankers Eric Colvin of Meadows Bank and John Sullivan with First Security Bank.  Mrs. Black Chernine, Mr. Colvin and Mr. Sullivan discuss the differences between the big banks from community banks (2:10), types of loans sold into secondary market (3:15), how real estate agents may list a foreclosed property owned by a community bank (8:20), benefits of trying to modify a loan with a community bank (10:00), loss share (13:45), how judicial foreclosure affects selling a property (18:16), tips to modify Fannie, Freddie or FHA loans (24:55), where community banks can invest (27:50) and how community banks compete with big banks (29:00).

Please tune in to AM720 KDWN’s “Legal Hour,” every Wednesday, from 9 AM to 10 AM.  Listen live on the radio or online.   Feel free to call in with your comments or questions at 702-257-5396.

To listen to past shows, visit our Media page.

In a recent news release, The Federal Housing Financing Agency gave word of new short sale guidelines for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac servicers.  The changes are set to go into affect November 01, 2012 and are meant to clarify and expedite the short sale process.  The announced alterations are as follows:

1)      Homeowners with a Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac mortgage will be permitted to sell their home in a short sale even if they are current on their mortgage if they have an eligible hardship, such as death of a borrower or co-borrower, divorce, disability, or relocation for a job, unemployment, business failure, etc., all without special approval from Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac;

2)      Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will waive the right to pursue deficiency judgments in exchange for a financial contribution when a borrower has sufficient income or assets to make cash contributions or sign promissory notes, whereby servicers will evaluate borrowers for additional capacity to cover the shortfall between the outstanding loan balance and the property sales price as part of approving the short sale;

3)      Special treatment will be provided to military personnel with Permanent Change of Station (PCS) orders; and

4)      Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will offer up to $6,000 to second lien holders to expedite a short sale.

All of the changes hint to incredible strides forward for borrowers, especially the provision that indicates borrowers will be considered without default and the limit on contributions to second lien holders.  They are claimed to create a single, uniform short sale procedure, with specific rules or timelines when a foreclosure sale is looming. Borrowers that short sell will not be eligible for a Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac loan for two years thereafter.

Homeowners can determine if they have a Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac loan by going to: or calling 800-7Fannie (8 am to 8 pm ET) or 800-Freddie (8 am to 8 pm ET)

Kristy Black, JD MBA

Black & LoBello on AM720 KDWN

Tune in as Black & LoBello offers free legal advice on a wide range of topics

Click here to listen to the Legal Hour on KDWN AM720 from August 22nd, 2012 in which Managing Partner, Tisha Black Chernine, Esq., discusses the lack of interest in real estate issues in the upcoming elections (2:10), student loan debt problems (4:10), how student loans are like credit cards (5:45), lease options on a house (9:45), Mitt Romney’s solution to the real estate crisis (18:55), criminal prosecutions of past financial crisis (21:22), the most recent bank scandals (24:40), tenant issues on a rental property (31:15) and HOA 101 (37:00).

Please tune in to AM720 KDWN’s “Legal Hour,” every Wednesday, from 9 AM to 10 AM.  Listen live on the radio or online.   Feel free to call in with your comments or questions at 702-257-5396.

To listen to past shows, visit our Media page.

The controversial company, MERS, continues to face critical review across the nation.  The Supreme Court of Washington, in particular, recently ruled against MERS in the arena of non-judicial foreclosures.  The Court succinctly stated that, “if MERS does not hold the note, it is not a lawful beneficiary.(

This is so because Washington law defines the “beneficiary” as “the holder of the instrument or document evidencing the obligations secured by the deed of trust.” See RCW 61.24.005(2).  Unfortunately, the Court could not go further to decide what the implications were of such a finding in the case at hand.

Similarly, the Supreme Court in Oregon recently accepted several certified questions regarding MERS, which may further clarify MERS’ role.  The certified questions include: (1) whether MERS may act as a beneficiary; and (2) whether MERS may retain and transfer legal title to a trust deed as nominee for the lender, after a note secured by the trust deed is transferred from the lender to a successor(s) or series.  Additionally, the Court will address the transfer of promissory notes and deeds of trusts.   See



Tagged with:

Must I Have a Prenup?

Many people believe that a prenuptial agreement is the only way to ensure a simple divorce if wedded bliss turns to dissatisfaction, but such an unromantic legal machination is not always necessary.  A prenuptial agreement might be necessary if either spouse owns a company prior to marriage, but it is not necessary to preserve the intent of the partnership known as marriage.

Most individuals planning to marry would agree that they do not want an interest in the assets their spouse owned prior to marriage, but they do expect their marriage to be a partnership wherein they build a future together.  The concept of marriage is, in fact, a romantic version of a legal partnership.  Both husband and wife bring to the table different qualities, skill sets, and financial resources.  It is possible to ensure that both the intent of the marriage and the spirit of the partnership are preserved. Under Nevada law, the definition of separate property (as opposed to community property) is any property owned by either spouse prior to marriage or received by them during the marriage via gift, inheritance or bequest. Therefore, as with a legal partnership, each spouse comes to the marriage with their own respective assets. Complications in the event of the dissolution of the marriage partnership (divorce) can only come when there has been a commingling of the property each spouse brought to the marriage with property they acquired during the marriage.

The definition of community property under Nevada law is any and all property acquired during the marriage and any earnings from employment during the marriage. It is very easy for a spouse, particularly a spouse who loves their partner, to commingle assets owned prior to marriage with assets earned or acquired during marriage. Nevertheless, strict separation of separate property and community property can be every bit as effective as a premarital agreement. Moreover, merely keeping one’s premarital property separate from community property is far more romantic than asking one’s fiancé to sign a premarital agreement.

Generally, the assets that parties bring to a marriage are in the form of a savings account or retirement account. The simple way to ensure that your separate property assets remain separate in the event of a divorce is to leave the premarital holdings in the accounts in which they originally sat prior to marriage. New accounts can be opened, and any earnings during the marriage should be deposited into those new accounts. Depositing marital earnings into premarital accounts can create difficult tracing issues which could jeopardize the separate property character of premarital assets.

In the event either spouse owns a home which actually has equity, that spouse should be aware that the paydown on the mortgage and improvements on the house paid for with monies earned during the marriage, could create a community property claim on what would otherwise be a separate property asset. As it pertains to such a residence, it is also important to note that even if a refinance is sought during the marriage, any refinance that would obligate a party’s spouse to the mortgage will also require the property be conveyed into joint tenancy.  Most transactions of this sort create a presumption that the transfer was intended to be a gift.  For the most part, any transfer from a separate property account or asset into joint tenancy will be deemed a gift from the transferring spouse to the community.

Absent a premarital agreement, the best way to limit potential claims and litigation in the event of a divorce is to ensure that no commingling occurs and that the entirety of the marital estate is comprised of assets or income acquired during the marriage.  Nothing prevents one spouse from being generous with their separate property by conveying the same into joint tenancy, but it is important for that spouse to know that by doing so, he or she is creating a gift which will likely be enforced in the event of divorce.  By simply leaving premarital assets as they are after marriage, either party can obtain most of the benefits of a premarital agreement without destroying the romance of marriage.

John D. Jones, Esq.

Asset Protection Techniques

Every day, potential clients come to find out how to protect their assets from potential creditors and lawsuits. Nevada law offers many “free” exemptions under NRS 21.090. However, many assets are still vulnerable such as non-homesteaded real property, bank accounts and investments. Fortunately, Nevada also offers other options for helping to safeguard these exposed assets.

Once risks and areas of exposure have been identified and the potential protection strategies have been carefully explored, a cost vs. benefit analysis should then be conducted before finally deciding which asset protection strategies to employ.

Two of the most widely used Nevada asset protection structures are the Nevada Limited Liability Company (LLC) and the Nevada Asset Protection Trust (NAPT).

Nevada LLC

A limited liability company formed in Nevada offers excellent domestic protection. Most practitioners agree that Nevada offers some of the most favorable corporate laws in the country. Some of the pros of a Nevada LLC are:

  • Nevada’s statues generally favor businesses;
  • The organizational requirements are quite informal- no annual meetings or minutes are necessary;
  • LLC’s are flexible structures that can be used in many different ways- to own property, to manage an operating business and to hold liquid assets;
  • LLC’s can be taxed in four different ways: as a disregarded entity, a partnership, an S-Corp or a C-Corp;
  • Nevada, unlike many other states, has no state income tax or corporate tax; and
  • Nevada LLC’s can be structured to maximize privacy and anonymity.

Perhaps most importantly, the members’ interests cannot be attached by a creditor. The only remedy against a member is to obtain a “Charging Order” allowing the creditor to lien or “charge” the member’s profit distribution rights when, or if, a distribution is made by the member of the LLC. As such, assets within the LLC are safe but trapped.

Nevada Asset Protection Trust

Nevada Asset Protection Trusts (NAPT) were created by The Nevada Spendthrift Trust Act, NRS 166.010 et seq. in 1999. Nevada is one of just a handful of states that provide a Trust of this sort.

This unique law lets an individual create a valid Grantor Trust where he or she is both the Trustee, the person who controls the Trust assets, and the beneficiary, while the assets within the Trust remain protected from creditors. Unlike many other states with similar laws, the Trust creator does not need to be a Nevada resident to create a NAPT. Additionally, any category of asset such as real property, personal property or liquid assets in any location can be protected with a NAPT.

NAPTs work in the following manner: By law, the Trust prohibits the assignment, alienation, acceleration and anticipation of any interest of the beneficiary under the Trust by the voluntary or involuntary act of the beneficiary or by operation of law or any process. Payments by the Distribution Trustee, a third party who has discretion to make distributions, are made only to the beneficiary who can also be the person establishing the Trust. The Trustee of a Spendthrift Trust is required to disregard and defeat every assignment or other act, voluntary or involuntary, that is attempted contrary to the provisions of the Nevada Spendthrift Act.

Some of the benefits of the Nevada Asset Protection Trust are:

  • You keep control of your assets;
  • You may receive the full benefit and use your own assets;
  • You don’t need to give away your assets;
  • You can protect any type, and an unlimited amounts, of assets from creditors;
  • The Nevada Asset Protection Trust is less expensive to form and maintain and much less complex than foreign or offshore Trusts which are often troubled by IRS audits and complicated tax reporting requirements;
  • The Nevada Asset Protection Trust may avoid loss of the assets through a bankruptcy; and
  • The Nevada Asset Protection Trust can be integrated with your estate plan (remember, a “Living” or “Family” Trust does NOT provide the creditor protection benefits discussed above).

With all of its benefits, there are some disadvantages to an NAPT. If the Grantor of the Trust is also a beneficiary, a third party Distribution Trustee must serve as well, which means that the Grantor does not have absolute discretion. Additionally, there is a two-year seasoning period. If a creditor is a current creditor when the transfer of the asset to the NAPT occurs, the creditor must bring suit against the property transfer within two (2) years of the transfer or within six (6) months after the creditor discovers, whichever is later. After the seasoning period is over, the creditor is barred from bringing suit to recover said property.

Both of these techniques, amongst others, can be extremely useful in protecting assets and providing peace of mind in our volatile economy.

Tiffany N. Ballenger, Esq.

Repair Credit In Four Steps

According to a recent report compiled by Experian, Las Vegas ranks in the bottom percentile of a national ranking of average credit scores. To be exact, Las Vegas had the nation’s eighth worst average credit score, 709, which ranked Las Vegas 136th out of the 143 cities polled. However, there are a few simple tricks that every Las Vegan can complete to raise their credit score immediately. Here is a list of simple tricks to use to repair your credit:

  1. Check your credit report for errors. Discovering any errors is the easiest and quickest tactic used to repair your credit report. A consumer is entitled to one (1) free credit report every year from each of the major credit bureaus, Experian, Transunion and Equifax. To obtain your free yearly copy of your credit report, you can go to each credit bureaus web site or you can visit to obtain a free credit report from each credit bureau.
  2. Remove errors from your credit report. Now that you are armed with your credit report, you need to review the report for its accuracy and dispute any errors. Each of the major credit bureaus allows for disputes to be logged on-line. Further, the dispute must be resolved with a reasonable period of time, which is usually 30-45 days from date of dispute.
  3. Use credit wisely. A poor credit report means you have been unable to properly use credit in the past. In order to re-establish that you are worthy of credit again, you need to demonstrate you can responsibly use credit and repay your debts. Start lowly, use one credit card and repay the ENTIRE balance every month. Over time, build up to two (2) or three (3) credit cards while repaying the ENTIRE balance every month. If, at any point in time, you can’t pay the entire balance at the end of the month, stop using all your credit cards until the balance is paid in full.
  4. Never carry a balance greater than 30% of the debt limit. A factor in determining your credit score is the amount of available credit. The credit bureaus do not like to see all of your credit maxed out. As such, never use or carry more than 30% of the available credit on any given card.

However, even if you follow the above tactics, you still need to be patient. Credit scores are not repaired overnight. It takes time to remove errors, pay down balances and re-establish a responsible credit history. But through persistence and the proper steps, you can and will repair your credit.

Randy M. Creighton, Esq.

AIG Pays Treasury Nearly $1B Amid Reports Slamming Bailout

American International Group (AIG) repaid nearly $1 billion in rescue funds from the Treasury Department Tuesday, the same day that a government office released a report slamming the Federal Reserve for apparent missteps in bailing out the financial institution in 2008.

To read the full article, click here.

Anatomy of a Bank Failure

Most people look forward to Fridays. They see it as the start of the weekend, time to catch up on responsibilities around the house, or just an opportunity to sleep in. Bankers have come to hate Fridays in recent years because it is the day that bank staffs are notified that their bank is being taken over by Federal and/or state regulators. Actually, senior bank executives and directors are notified no later than Wednesday; however, they cannot advise their lower level staff until Friday.

Friday, October 14, 2011 saw four banks close in Aledo, Illinois; Cranford, New Jersey; Ashville, North Carolina; and Gray, Georgia. Georgia, and particularly the Atlanta metropolitan area, with 63, holds the dubious distinction of having the largest number of bank failures in the country since January 2009. In contrast, Nevada saw eight banks fail during that same period.

The failed banks’ size, in terms of assets, ranged from Public Savings Bank of Huntingdon Valley, Pennsylvania, with $46.8 million to Colonial Bank of Montgomery, Alabama with $25 billion in assets. July 2009 was the month with the single highest number of bank failures during that period. The 24 banks that failed had combined assets of over $10 billion. That month alone cost U.S. taxpayers over $3 billion.

The FDIC maintains a “problem bank” list. The banks on the list are advised during regular or special bank examinations of regulatory deficiencies. These problems can range from undercapitalization, over-concentration of loans of a certain type such as commercial or residential loans, or even deficiencies in the makeup of the bank’s board of directors.

Generally, customers should not worry about their accounts since most banks are replaced by larger, stronger banks. Stronger, well capitalized banks earn the privilege of being placed on a list that allows them to acquire weaker failing banks. The acquiring bank is told in advance of the target bank. Next, it signs a non-disclosure agreement and an agreement with the FDIC to assume the target bank’s deposits. Finally, it takes over branches and other assets it may want and continues banking relationships with the target bank’s customers.

The FDIC is often appointed as receiver for failed banks including state charted banks. FDIC officials and state regulators typically arrive at the bank branch around 4:00 PM. Moving with efficiency and speed, they put up closed signs and advise customers that they can still use ATM machines or return to the branch on Monday. The employees are then placed in a room and are told they no longer work for the bank.

Some employees are terminated immediately and are sent home. Others are kept on to assist the FDIC and its asset managers in winding up the bank’s affairs. This includes some loan officers and others with institutional knowledge of the bank’s business. Senior executives and directors are typically terminated immediately but are required to remain available should the FDIC or the asset managers have any questions regarding the bank’s business.

The FDIC has brought former experienced employees who have retired or moved to other jobs back to the agency in the past three years to help with the increased number of bank failures. These employees include clerical staff, bank examiners, compliance examiners, economists, information technology staff, and financial analysts. Some former bankers have spent years moving from failed bank to failed bank, working in stints ranging from a few months to as long as two years.

Most failed banks’ assets, such as bank accounts, branches and loans are sold to other banks or institutions. However, those banks that are not sold are operated, sans banking and lending operations, by the FDIC until it sells off all the assets including furniture and fixtures.

Banks whose accounts and branches have been sold will have a “sock” placed over the former signage on the Friday the bank is taken over and a new “sock” containing the acquiring bank’s name will replace it over the weekend. Monday morning, the bank reopens on time with the new bank’s name and often with the same most visible employees, tellers and branch managers. The greatest problem for the new bank will be to assure the customers that they still have access to their bank accounts.

The FDIC presently insures deposits including principal and any accrued interest through the date of the insured bank’s closing, up to the insurance limit of $250,000 per depositor, per insured bank, for each account ownership category. Types of accounts insured include checking accounts, negotiable order of withdrawal (NOW) accounts, savings accounts, money market deposit accounts (MMDA) or time deposits such as a certificate of deposit (CD) and dollar-for-dollar accounts. Special provisions have been put in place from December 31, 2010 through December 31, 2012, that fully insures all noninterest-bearing transaction accounts regardless of the account balance and the ownership capacity of the funds. This coverage is available to all depositors including consumers, businesses and government entities. The unlimited coverage is separate from, and in addition to, the insurance coverage provided for a depositor’s other accounts held at an FDIC-insured bank.

A single bank failure could cause a breakdown of the public’s trust in our nation’s banking system. Therefore, the FDIC’s mandates and procedures ensure that nothing undermines public confidence in federal deposit insurance or the banking system.

Andras F. Babero, Esq.

Graphs provided by

Black & LoBello on the Radio

Click here to listen to the Legal Hour on KDWN AM720 from September 7th, 2011 in which Managing Partner, Tisha Black Chernine, Esq., discusses the lawsuit between Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and 17 major banks and the arguments on either side, the Nevada Homestead Act, refinancing home loans and modification options, consumer rights under the Debt Collections Practices Act, loan ownership investigations, deed in lieu programs and the effects of a short sale vs. foreclosure.

Please tune in to AM720 KDWN’s “Legal Hour,” everyday, from 9 AM to 10 AM.  Listen live on the radio or online.   Feel free to call in with your comments or questions at 702-257-5396.

SB 414 Restricts Banks

Senate Bill No. 414 was introduced to address some of the consequences of the downturn in the current real estate market. Section 2 of the Bill was intended to prevent a bank from calling a commercial mortgage loan due if the borrower is not in default.  That section was quickly eliminated by amendment from the final bill.

SB 414 mandates lenders respond to short sale requests within a reasonable period of time.  A “reasonable period of time” is defined to mean a response within 90 days after receipt of the offer, unless the parties agree to a written extension of time.

Section 3 was the gravamen of SB 414.  It prohibits a lender from unreasonably delaying a response to an offer for a residential short sale. It further prevents lenders from obtaining a deficiency judgment against a borrower in certain instances.

The Nevada Senate Committee on Commerce, Labor and Energy (the “Committee”) (where the bill originated) was concerned about lenders pursuing deficiency judgments against residential borrowers after they had completed a short sale.  Senator Schneider,  said the following:

“I was concerned about people who are upside down in the mortgages on their homes, cannot make payments anymore, for whatever reason, and they short sell their home. I do not want banks going after the seller for the difference between what the house sold for and the mortgage.”

The Committee sought to remedy this issue by prohibiting lenders from further pursuing the borrower after the short sale has been concluded, if all the parties agreed.

William Uffelman, President and CEO of the Nevada Bankers Association (the “NBA”), testifying on behalf of the lenders, sought to balance the lenders’ very real concern of potentially having to write down or write off loans to satisfy the FDIC, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, or U.S Department of the Treasury, with individuals being forced into bankruptcy or foreclosure while trying to protect their homes.

Typically, lenders that hold first deeds of trust are more willing to forego a deficiency, whereas second deeds of trust holders are less likely to do so. Short sales are often held up because second trust deed holders are more intransigent. Lenders also will seek to take a strategic advantage by delaying responding to the borrower’s overtures for a short sale. SB 414 addressed both issues.

The NBA’s Mr. Uffelman conceded that financial institutions could retain the right to a deficiency judgment right if they responded within a reasonable period of time, and they reserved the right to a deficiency judgment in the short sale agreement executed by all the parties. This allows a lender to pursue a borrower for a deficiency judgment when the borrower makes a “strategic default,” yet it gives most borrowers finality.

As Senator Schneider so eloquently stated, “the concept here is that for all our constituents who are doing short sales, we do not want to leave them hanging there and later have the big bank looking to squeeze more blood out of them.”

Historically, the forgiven or waived portion of a debt is subject to tax as income when all or a portion of a debt has been forgiven by a lender. However, Congress enacted a law in 2007, which does not subject debt forgiveness to tax when the forgiven debt is due to foreclosure. SB 414’s deficiency judgment waiver rules prohibit any debt forgiveness liability under any IRS tax rule changes that may take place after December 31, 2012.

The Committee believed it was not enough for the borrower to depend on a statement of the lenders’ intent to waive a deficiency judgment. The Committee wanted to have all parties state their intentions regarding a waiver of a deficiency judgment in clear and unambiguous language. Thus, SB 414 will require a written, conspicuous statement, acknowledged by the debtor or grantor which states that the lender has waived its right to recover a deficiency and the amount of recovery that is being waived.

SB 414 was approved by Governor Sandoval on June 13, 2011.

Andras F. Babero, Esq.

Chris Phillips on KLAV AM 1230

Christopher J. Phillips, Esq., guest stars on the Legal Hour hosted by Attorney Malcolm LaVergne.  To listen to Mr. Phillips explain how domestic partners may be designated as the beneficiaries of a trust click here.

A former civilian Army employee pleaded guilty on May 19, 2011, to stealing funds from the Army Emergency Relief (AER) Office at Camp Humphreys in Korea during 2005 and 2006. As you know, the AER funds are designed to be used to provide low interest loans, grants and other assistance to Army members and their dependents and are totally funded by contributions. After his guilty plea, the accused faces a possible ten years in prison and a $250,000.00 fine for his “take” of only $9,000.00+. The case was investigated by DCIS and the Army Audit Agency and is being prosecuted by the Department of Justice.  Click here to read the whole story.

Carlos L. McDade, Esq.


Call to Action! Email Your Support of SB348

Recently, Nevada Assemblyman William Horne introduced an amendment to the current Bill SB348 that eliminates the current creditor exemptions.  Black & LoBello urges everyone to email Assemblyman Horne and tell him you want Bill SB348 passed AS IT WAS INTRODUCED, WITHOUT AMENDMENT! This amendment is a huge blow against every citizen in Nevada.   If you or your clients know Chairman Horne or Assemblyman Frierson, please call or email this committee and tell them to remove the amendment and pass our creditor protection bill as originally submitted. 

Assembly Judiciary Committee Members

Name Position Party Email
William Horne Chairman D [email protected]
James Ohrenschall Vice-Chair D [email protected]
Steven Brooks D [email protected]
Richard Carrillo D [email protected]
Skip Daly D [email protected]
Olivia Diaz D [email protected]
Marilyn Dondero Loop D [email protected]
Jason Frierson D [email protected]
Tick Segerblom D [email protected]
Scott Hammond R [email protected]
Ira Hansen R [email protected]
Kelly Kite R [email protected]
Richard McArthur R [email protected]
Mark Sherwood R [email protected]

Michele T. LoBello, Esq.

Tagged with:

On May 11, 2011, JAM Properties International and The Bouchard Brothers held an investor event at the Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce in which Carlos L. McDade, Esq., took part in discussing Landlords, Tenants and Evictions.

Page 1 of 512345