Opinion ID: 874219
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Did the District Court Err in Granting Bank's Motion for Summary Judgment?

Text: The district court initially granted summary judgment on both Bank's claim for breach of the credit card agreement and its claim for breach of an account stated. In response to Cardholder's motion for reconsideration, the court vacated the grant of summary judgment with respect to the claim for breach of an account stated. Cardholder contends that the court also erred in granting summary judgment for breach of the credit card account. He asserts that the dispute letters attached to his affidavit in support of his motion for reconsideration create a genuine issue of material fact. He does not point to anything in the letters that allegedly create a disputed issue of fact. He merely writes, The same dispute letters disputed the amount FIA claimed in its breach of contract claim just as the account stated claim was disputed. The first letter was dated December 23, 2004, and it included the following: I am disputing the above amount because I believe that you failed to credit my account for prepayments you agreed to credit on the statement dated December 14, 2004. It was my understanding that when I entered into the agreement with you that you would accept my signed note(s) or other similar instrument(s) as money, credit or payment for previous account transactions, and then reflect those credits in the statement dated December 14, 2004. They do not appear in the statement and I am wondering why. The amount of the credits on the prepayments of money or credit accepted by you should be the approximate amount that I list above [$10,617.94]. I am making this billing inquiry since I am uncertain of all the dates of the prepaid credits, charges and also since there may be additional credits that I am entitled to. Please provide me with a written explanation why these credits are not showing. The second letter was dated November 3, 2006, and it included the following: In preparation for this Notice and Demand, I have conducted a full and complete investigation into this matter, and I am of the opinion that MBNA America Bank, N.A. may be in breach of the terms and conditions of the alleged Credit Card Agreement, by its failure to provide either adequate and valuable consideration, or full disclosure of the material terms and conditions of the alleged original agreement, including the nature and extent of any finance charges assessed on the above account. In addition, I have reason to believe that your company has failed to properly credit me for all revenues received by you related to this account. In the event that the application or other evidence of this account was monetized, securitized and/or sold, please provide me with certified copies of all underlying documentation regarding said transactions. Although both letters were attached to Cardholder's affidavit, he did not state in his affidavit that any of the factual assertions in the letters were true. With respect to the first letter, he merely stated that it was a true and correct copy of a letter he had mailed and that the letter disputed the amount of the debt shown on the December 14th 2004 statement. With respect to the second letter, he also stated that it was a true and correct copy of the letter he had mailed and that the letter questions the nature and extent of any finance charges. In his reply to Bank's counterclaims, Cardholder had admitted that he entered into an credit card agreement with the Defendant [Bank] whereby the Defendant agreed to extend a revolving line of credit to the Plaintiff for cash advances or the purchase of goods and services. In support of Bank's motion for summary judgment, its agent stated in his affidavit that each month an account statement was sent to the Plaintiff indicating the account balance due and owing, that as of July 2005, the account balance owed to Defendant by the Plaintiff was $12,459.74 which reflects the unpaid statements, and that since December 6, 2004, Plaintiff has made no payment on the account. Cardholder does not point to any sworn statement creating a genuine issue of material fact as to the amount owing on his credit card account. The district court did not err in granting Bank's motion for summary judgment.