612-877-5000 | Contact us

BANKING AND COMMERCIAL TRANSACTIONS

Moss & Barnett is privileged to represent a number of regional and community banks in their lending transactions, workouts and foreclosures, litigation and regulatory matters.

In addition, the attorneys at Moss & Barnett routinely represent individuals and businesses in a variety of commercial transactions, including:

Product sales and warranties
Equipment leases
Service, management and consulting contracts
Software sales and licensing
Borrowing and lending
Guaranties
Secured transactions
Collections
Letters of credit

Our Banking and Commercial Transactions group is qualified and well-positioned to help borrowers and lenders meet their needs, opportunities and challenges in an ever-more challenging and entrepreneurial environment.

Attorneys in this Area

Kevin M. Busch
(Chair)

News Headlines

News

Financial Services

[02/03] Aon Reports Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2011 Results
[02/03] Yucheng Technologies Announces Conference Call on February 15, 2012 to Discuss Fourth Quarter and Fiscal Year 2011 Financial Results

More...

Case Summaries

Banking Law

[02/01] GECCMC 2005-C1 Plummer Street Office L.P. v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.
In a suit alleging breach of lease agreements that the defendant bank assumed after it purchased a failed bank's assets and liabilities from the FDIC pursuant to the terms of a written purchase and assumption agreement, the district court's grant of the bank's motion to dismiss is affirmed, where under federal common law, the plaintiff lacked standing to bring suit under the agreement because it was not an intended third-party beneficiary of the agreement.

[01/24] TIFD III-E, Inc. v. US
In a suit by a taxpayer partner challenging IRS notices of adjustment reallocating a large percentage of the partnership's income for the years 1993 to 1998 to the taxpayer away from two Dutch banks that had purchased an interest in the partnership, and imposing a penalty for underpayment, the district court's judgment in favor of the taxpayer is reversed, where: 1) the banks' interest was not a capital interest for purposes of qualifying them as partners within the meaning of IRC section 704(e)(1); and 2) the taxpayer failed to point to substantial authority supporting its position, so that the government was entitled to impose a penalty on the taxpayer for substantial understatement of income.

[01/20] CRM Collateral II, Inc. v. TriCounty Metropolitan Transportation Dist. of Oregon
In proceedings following default on a standby letter of credit, the district court's disposition of the case on cross-motions for summary judgment is reversed and the case remanded, where: 1) the district court incorrectly concluded that the applicant for the letter of credit was a surety and erroneously permitted it to assert the defense of discharge; and 2) the applicant was not entitled to an award of damages because the beneficiary's draw on the letter of credit did not violate the statutory warranty to the applicant that the drawing did not violate any agreement between the applicant and the beneficiary.