Summary
granting summary judgment since debtor failed to establish "nonexistence, extinguishment, or variance in payment of the obligation"
Summary of this case from Trident Steel Corp. v. Cow Path Energy, L.L.C.Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO: 08-1566 SECTION: R (5).
February 27, 2009
ORDER
On January 6, 1993, defendant Janine Laurent executed two promissory notes payable to the U.S. Department of Education under the Louisiana Office of Student Financial Assistance. The two notes promised to repay a combined principal of $2,275.00 plus interest at a variable rate set annually by the U.S. Department of Education. Laurent defaulted on both notes, leaving a combined outstanding balance of $5,104.28. The United States sued Laurent to recover this balance and now moves for summary judgment. Laurent has not filed an opposition.
In a suit on a promissory note under Louisiana law, the creditor establishes its prima facie case by producing the notes. E.g., Dugas v. Modular Quarters, Inc., 561 So.2d 192, 200 (La.Ct.App. 1990); see also e.g., United States v. Grieshaber, 2000 WL 1357512, at *2 (E.D.La. 2000); United States v. Ward, 1992 WL 373557, at *2 (E.D.La. 1992). "Once the note is introduced into evidence, the burden of proof shifts to the debtor to establish nonexistence, extinguishment, or variance in payment of the obligation." Dugas, 561 So.2d at 200 ( citing Merchants Trust Sav. Bank v. Don's Intern., 538 So.2d 1060 (La.Ct.App. 1989). The United States has met its burden here by attaching Laurent's two promissory notes to its summary judgment motion along with the affidavit of the U.S. Department of Education employee authorized to certify records. (R. Doc. 10-5.) This affidavit attests that the attached notes are accurate and complete copies. ( Id.) To defeat summary judgment Laurent was required to "establish nonexistence, extinguishment, or variance in payment of the obligation," Dugas, 561 So.2d at 200, but she has not responded to the government's motion. The Court accordingly GRANTS summary judgment in the United States' favor. See Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322-24 (1986) (non-moving party must point to specific facts creating an issue for trial); see also United States v. Ward, 1992 WL 373557, at *2 (granting summary judgment for United States when debtor did not provide any evidence of non-existence, variance, or extinguishment of obligation).