ILNews

Indiana IOLTA expected to benefit from Bank of America settlement

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana’s Interest on Lawyers’ Trust Account program is expecting to receive a portion of the federal government’s historic multi-billion-dollar settlement with Bank of America, bringing a much-needed influx of funds to the program that has suffered dramatic declines in revenues as a result of the economic recession.

Charles Dunlap, executive director of the Indiana Bar Foundation which administers the state’s IOLTA program, said he is pleased with the additional resources but cautioned the financial help will not arrive immediately.

“It could take several years for the funds to be distributed so relief for people struggling with mortgage foreclosure could still be more than a year away,” he said.

Dunlap was recently elected president of the National Association of IOLTA programs. He has been a member of the national organization for 13 years.

The U.S. Department of Justice announced the $16.65 billion settlement Aug. 21 to resolve federal and state claims against Bank of America and its former and current subsidiaries, including Countrywide Financial Corp. and Merrill Lynch, for financial fraud leading to and during the Great Recession.

This is the largest civil settlement with a single entity in American history and will provide billions of dollars in relief to struggling homeowners.

Although the portion of the settlement slated to come to Indiana is unknown, Dunlap, said the amount will be significant.

“While $17 billion is certainly a big number, the portion that Indiana’s IOLTA program will receive is only a small portion of the overall amount and comes on the heels of over five years of unprecedented low revenues due to the historically low prevailing interest rate environment we have experienced,” Dunlap said. “We are extremely grateful for the increased ability we will have to help struggling Hoosiers with these settlement funds, but we have to be patient to see how all the details work out.”

 
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  2. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  3. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  4. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  5. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

ADVERTISEMENT