### STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT


### NO. 2021 CA 1277 GULFCO OF LOUISIANA, LLC, D/B/A 

### TOWER LOAN OF CUT OFF

VERSUS 

## u" ASHLEY B. CHERAMIE, A/K/A ASHLEY CHERAMIE AND NICHOLAS CHERAMIE Judgment Rendered: 

### APR 2 6 2022

APPEAL FROM THE SEVENTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

IN AND FOR THE PARISH OF LAFOURCHE

STATE OF LOUISIANA DOCKET NUMBER 133694 HONORABLE STEVEN M. MILLER,JUDGE PRESIDING

Jessica L. Greber Shreveport, LA 

### Ashley B. Cheramie Golden Meadow, LA
Nicholas Cheramie Golden Meadow, LA Attorneys for Plaintiff - Appellant Gulfco of Louisiana, LLC d/b/a Tower Loan of Cut Off
Defendant -

Appellee, In Proper Person
Defendant -

Appellee, In Proper Person

BEFORE: McDONALD, LANIER,AND WOLFE, JJ.McDONALD, J. 

### This is an appeal from ajudgment in favor ofthe borrower after a trial on the 

### merits regarding two check loans. After review, we reverse and renderjudgment in favor ofthe holder.FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Gulfco ofLouisiana, LLC d/b/a Tower Loan ofCut Off ( Gulfco), is the holder 

### oftwo loans owed by Ashley B. Cheramie. The loans resulted from two " check loans" made out to Ms. Cheramie for $2, 503. 93 each, which were mailed to Ms. Cheramie as a solicitation. Ms. Cheramie deposited the checks at her bankto borrow 

### the money on December 31, 2015 and April 26, 2017. Ms. Cheramie made most of 

### the payments on the first check loan, leaving a principal balance of $ 223. 18 due, plus interest. Ms. Cheramie made no payments on the second check loan. Thereafter, on September 25, 2017, Gulfco filed suit against Ms. Cheramie and her husband, Nicholas Cheramie. Gulfco maintained that Ms. Cheramie owed
an unpaid balance of $ 223. 18 on the first check loan, together with 31. 65 percent 

## interest per annum for one year starting on April 3, 2017, 18 percent per annum 

### thereafter, until paid in full, as well as costs and attorney fees. On the second loan Gulfco maintained that Ms. Cheramie owed an unpaid balance of $2,897.43, 

## together with 31.65 percent interest per annum for one year starting on September 139 20179 18 percent interest per annum thereafter, until paid in full, plus $ 10. 50 in 

## late charges, as well as costs and attorney fees. Gulfco attached copies of both 

## checks signed by Ms. Cheramie and processed by her bank, along with lost note affidavits from Gulfco' s branch manager,attestingthatthe documents were true and

correct copies. 

## Gulfco maintained that the debts were incurred during the Cheramies' marriage andwere acommunity obligation. Gulfcoprayed forjudgment 

## in its favor againstAshley and Nicholas Cheramie forthe debts, including interest, late charges, costs, and attorney fees. KNicholas Cheramie answered the petition, 

### generally denying most of the allegations. In his answer to the request for admissions offact, Nicholas Cheramie 

### denied that the parties had a community ofacquets and gains at the time the loans were taken out and maintained that the parties had a prenuptial agreement. The 

## prenuptial agreement between Ashley and Nicholas Cheramie, dated January 19, 2005, was attached. Ms. Cheramie answered the petition, 

### generally admitting most of the allegations. She maintained that she and Nicholas had a prenuptial agreement in 

### place, that Nicholas had no knowledge ofthe note, and that he did not sign the note. She admitted the amount due on the first note was $223. 18, with interest at 31. 65 

### percent forone year beginning April 3, 2017, and thereafter atthe rate of 18 percent 

## perannum, until paid in full,and forall costs and reasonable attorney fees as set by the court. Ms. Cheramie admitted that the amount due on the second note was 

### 897.43, 1 together with interest at the rate of 31. 65 percent per annum for one year 

### beginning September 13, 2017, and thereafter at the rate of 18 percent per annum, 

### until paid in full,along with $

## 10.50 in late charges, all costs, and reasonable attorney fees set bythe court. 

## Gulfco filed a motion for summaryjudgment asserting that it was entitled to ajudgment against Ms. Cheramie as a matter of law. Gulfco attached copies ofthe 

### two check loans signed by Ms. Cheramie, along with lost note affidavits from its branch managercertifying thatthe documents weretrue and correct copies and were a reproduction ofits records maintained on file in the course of its business. Gulfco also attached an affidavit ofthe correctness ofthe account from its branch manager, 

### and an affidavit asking for attorney fees in the amount of25 percent ofthe unpaid debt after default.

1 This appears to be atypographical error asthe balance stated in the petition was $2,897.43. 3

### The summaryjudgment was apparently denied, as the matter proceeded to a

trial on the merits against Ms. Cheramie.' 

### Gulfco was the only party present at the trial. 

### Gulfco introduced copies ofthe two check loans signed by Ms. Cheramie into
evidence. Gulfco' s branch manager testified that the original check loans were deposited at Ms. Cheramie' s bank and destroyed. At the close ofthe trial, the trial court found that Gulfco had presented insufficient evidence ofthe loans and denied Gulfco' s claims. The trial court signed ajudgment in favor of Ms. Cheramie and against Gulfco on June 1, 2021. Gulfco appealed thatjudgment. 

### Gulfco makes the following assignment oferror on appeal. 

### The trial court erred in finding that there was insufficient evidence to support enforcement ofthe instruments sued upon, and by failing to accept the reproductions ofthe instruments as " prima facie proof of [their] contents with the same force and effect as though the original document[s] were produced," pursuant to [ La. R.S. 13: 3733. 1C]. The trial court' s decision imposes an additional 

### evidentiary burden upon financial institutions to show an apparent chain of custody" when seeking enforcement of negotiable instruments. This additional burden of proof is not required or even contemplated under the provisions of [La. R.S. 13: 3733. 1]. More 

### importantly, there is no " chain of custody" rule for civil matters in Louisiana. DISCUSSION Questions oflaw are reviewed de novo. 

### City ofBaton Rouge/Parish ofEast Baton Rouge v. Myers, 2013- 2011 ( La. 5/7/ 14), 145 So.3d 320, 327. The issue 

### herein is whetherthe trial court correctly interpreted and applied the law. Harris v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.,

### 2009-0034 (La.App. 1 Cir.2/5/ 10), 35 So.3d 266, 273. 

### A check loan is a pre - approved loan offer made through a home solicitation 

### by mail. When Ms. Cheramie endorsedthe checks and depositedthem into her bank account, she created loans that must be repaid pursuant the terms described in the check loan offer disclosures, which were attached to the check. See La. R.S. 9:3541. 1A(2).



### z The record before usdoes notcontain a ruling on the motion for summaryjudgment,nor does itcontain a dismissal ofthe claims against Nicholas Cheramie.

### The front ofthe check loans at issue herein include a warning in accordance

with La. R.S. 9:3541. 1: 3 WARNING: THE CASHING OF THIS CHECK WILL ENROLL YOU IN A PROGRAM OR A LOAN, OR WILL CAUSE YOU TO BE BOUND TO REPAY THE LOAN OR PURCHASE GOODS OR SERVICES WHICH MAY COST YOU ADDITIONAL MONEY. PROPER ENDORSEMENT REQUIRED. NON - TRANSFERABLE. 

### The back ofthe check loans above the borrower's signature line signed by Ms. Cheramie states: BY ENDORSING THIS INSTRUMENT YOU AGREE TO REPAY THIS LOAN ACCORDING TO THE TERMS OF THE CONSUMER PROMISSORY NOTE AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ACCOMPANYING THIS CHECK WHICH YOU ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIVING AND WHICH PROVIDES YOU WITH ADDITIONAL CONTRACT TERMS IN CONNECTION WITH THIS LOAN TRANSACTION. INCLUDING AN ARBITRATION AGREEMENT. The check loans also include a disclosure form page that was attached to them, and which provides the terms ofthe loans. Louisiana Code of Evidence article 901A provides that authentication or 

### identification is satisfied by a showing that a matter in question is what a proponent
claims. 

### Authentication can be satisfied by the testimony of a witness with knowledge. La. C.E. art.90113( 1). Louisiana Revised Statutes 13: 3733. 113 provides 

## that any financial institution may reproduce any ofits original records used by such 

## financial institution during the course of its regular business activities and may thereafter destroy the original record in the regular course ofits business activities. Additionally, La. R.S. 13: 3733. 1G(2) provides that a reproduction of a check that 

### has been destroyed by a financial institution in the regular course of its business 

## activities shall be deemed to be an original ofsuch check in ajudicial proceeding or

3 La. R.S. 9:3541. 1E provides that such a check shall contain the following language as a conspicuous caption: WARNING: THE CASHING OF THIS CHECK WILL ENROLL YOU IN A PROGRAM OR A LOAN, OR WILL CAUSE YOU TO BE BOUND TO REPAY THE LOAN OR PURCHASE GOODS OR SERVICES WHICH MAY COST YOU ADDITIONAL MONEY.
5

### action involving a claim based on or involving such check.' Louisiana Revised

Statutes 13: 3733. 1C provides that reproductions made pursuant to that statute shall be received as prima facie proof of its contents with the same force and effect as though the original document were produced, and shall be deemed authentic for all 

### purposes, thereby satisfying the requirements ofLa. C.C. art. 901. Gulfco attached copies ofthe signed check loans, lost note affidavits, and an affidavit of correctness of account to its petition. Gulfco' s branch manager, Erica 

### Terrebonne, testified at trial regarding the amount ofthe check loans, the payments made, and the balances due. Gulfco introduced copies ofthe signed check loans and payment statements into evidence at trial. Ms. Terrebonne testified that Gulfco was the holder of the check loans, and the check loans were payable to Ms. Cheramie. Ms. Terrebonne testified that Ms. Cheramie endorsed the check loans and then deposited them into her State Bank & Trust account. She testified that Gulfco did not get the original signed check loans 

### and disclosure statements back because they were destroyed by Ms. Cheramie' s bank; that Gulfco received copies of the endorsed check loans from State Bank & Trust; and that true and correct copies of the signed check loans and disclosure statements were kept in the regular course of Gulfco' s business. Ms. Terrebonne testified that Ms. Cheramie made most ofthe payments on the first loan, but left a 

### balance of $

223. 18 unpaid, and was therefore in default on the first loan under the



## 4 In orderfora document to be a negotiable promissory note, itmust meetthe requirements ofLa. R.S. 10:3- 104. These are ( 1) be signed by the maker or drawer; (2) contain an unconditional promise or order to pay a sum certain in money; (3) be payable on demand or at a definite time; and (4) be payable to order 

### ofbearer. DixieWeb Graphic Corp.v. Sharp, 619 So.2d 1173, 1175 (La.App. 1 Cir.1993).

ONterms of the contract. Ms. Terrebonne testified that on the second loan, Ms.



### Cheramie made no payments, and the loan was accelerated upon default. Ms. Terrebonne testified that the balance due on loan number two was $

### 2,514.43.5 After de novo review, 

### we find that Gulfco clearly presented sufficient 

## evidence ofthe checkloans andthatthetrial court legallyerredbyfinding otherwise. Thus, we reverse the trial courtjudgment and we renderjudgment in favor ofGulfco. CONCLUSION 

### For the foregoing reasons, the trial courtjudgment denying all relief prayed for by Gulfco of Louisiana, LLC d/b/a Tower Loan of Cut Off is reversed, and judgment is rendered in favor of Gulfco of Louisiana, LLC d/b/a/ Tower Loan of 

### Cut Offand against Ashley B. Cheramie in the amount of $ 223. 18, with interest at 

### the rate of 31. 65 percent per annum for one year beginning April 3, 2017, and thereafter at the rate of 18 percent per annum, and in the amount of $ 2, 514.43, with 

## interest atthe rate of31.65 percentperannum foroneyear beginning September 13, 2017, and thereafter at the rate of 18 percent per annum, and for $ 10.50 in late 

## charges, and forattorneyfees of $ 684.40.6 Costs ofthis appeal are assessed against Ashley B. Cheramie. REVERSED AND RENDERED.



### 5The payoffstatement forthe second check loan showsthatthetotal to payoffthe second check loan was calculated with a beginning balance of $ 3, 150.00, which included a finance charges of $ 646.07. After Ms. Cheramie defaulted onthe second check loan and the loan was accelerated,the finance chargewas refunded, leaving a balance of $

2,503.93. A late charge of $ 10.50 was added, for a total $2,514.43 payoffbalance.

6 Attorney fees are calculated herein at 25 percent ofthe unpaid balance due on the loans, $223. 18 on the first loan and $2, 514.43 on the second loan, for a total unpaid balance of $ 2, 737.61.