310 Ga. App. 1
Ga. Ct. App.2011Background
- Asset Acceptance sued Benson on an open account, alleging it was the real party in interest through assignment from Citibank USA.
- Benson moved for summary judgment, arguing Asset Acceptance failed to show a valid written assignment identifying both assignor and assignee.
- The trial court denied Benson’s summary judgment; Asset Acceptance sought interlocutory review of that denial.
- Georgia law requires privity and a written assignment to enforce a contractual right by an assignee.
- Record shows Citibank South Dakota issued Benson a Diner’s Club card, and Citibank USA allegedly assigned some accounts to Asset Acceptance, but no evidence showed Citibank South Dakota assigned Benson’s account to Citibank USA.
- The court held the assignment evidence was insufficient to prove Asset Acceptance was the real party in interest.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Asset Acceptance is the real party in interest | Benson | Benson | Summary judgment reversed; Asset Acceptance not shown to be real party. |
| Whether the assignment was in writing and properly identified | Asset Acceptance | Benson | Assignment not proven in writing; invalid for enforcement. |
| Whether CitiBank USA acquired Benson’s account from CitiBank South Dakota | Asset Acceptance | Benson | No proof CitiBank South Dakota assigned Benson’s account to CitiBank USA. |
Key Cases Cited
- Wirth v. Cach, LLC, 300 Ga.App. 488 (2009) (privity and assignment requirements for real party in interest)
- Hutto v. CACV of Colorado, 308 Ga.App. 469 (2011) (assignment proof and real party in interest standards)
- Green v. Cavalry Portfolio Svcs., 305 Ga.App. 843 (2010) (assignment and standing considerations)
- Latimore v. City of Atlanta, 289 Ga. App. 85 (2008) (summary judgment evidence admissibility and standards)
- McKinley v. State, 303 Ga.App. 203 (2010) (evidence admissibility standards on summary judgment)