273 So. 3d 656
La. Ct. App.2019Background
- Doerle Food Services provided goods to River Valley Foods, LLC (RVF) from April 2013–April 2015; RVF executed an open account credit agreement and Leon Miletello signed a continuing guaranty.
- Doerle sued RVF and Miletello on an open account, guaranty, and breach of contract seeking $72,308.93 plus interest, costs, and 25% attorney fees.
- Doerle moved for summary judgment supported by invoices, statements, the credit agreement, guaranty, and an affidavit by its accounting manager attesting to unpaid balance.
- Defendants filed late, self-serving affidavits claiming $20,000–$25,000 in uncredited payments but did not file supporting documents into the record as ordered.
- Trial court granted summary judgment to Doerle; awarded principal, 18% interest, 25% attorney fees, judicial interest, and costs. Defendants’ motion for new trial was denied; they appealed.
- On de novo review the appellate court affirmed summary judgment but amended the interest award: conventional interest set at 12% per annum from when debt was due and vacated award of judicial interest.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Entitlement to summary judgment on open account | Doerle: invoices, account records, affidavit show unpaid balance and prima facie entitlement | Defs: competing affidavits assert payments not credited, creating genuine issue | Summary judgment for Doerle; plaintiff made prima facie case, defendants failed to produce documentary proof of credits |
| 2. Whether defendants' affidavits created genuine issues of material fact | Doerle: defendants’ affidavits are unsupported and untimely; no admissible records filed | Defs: affidavits assert uncredited payments and dispute amount owed | Court: unsupported, untimely affidavits insufficient to defeat summary judgment; no credibility call required |
| 3. Sufficiency of Doerle's affidavit & business records | Doerle: accounting manager personally prepared invoices and identified records | Defs: challenged affidavit as not stating records were kept in ordinary course | Court: Romero competent; attached invoices prepared in course of business sufficient to establish prima facie case; objection not preserved but de novo review supports adequacy |
| 4. Proper interest to award | Doerle sought varying rates (pleadings cited 18% or 12%); requested contractual interest and judicial interest | Defs: implicitly contest rate and calculation | Court: conventional interest limited to 12% per La. C.C. art. 2000 (agreement implied maximum lawful rate); vacated award of judicial interest; interest runs from debt due date |
Key Cases Cited
- Peironnet v. Matador Res. Co., 144 So. 3d 791 (La. 2013) (standard of appellate de novo review on summary judgment)
- Schultz v. Guoth, 57 So. 3d 1002 (La. 2011) (summary judgment favored to secure just, speedy, inexpensive resolution)
- Frey Plumbing Co., Inc. v. Foster, 996 So. 2d 969 (La. 2008) (definition and scope of open account)
- Monsanto Co. v. KT Farms P'ship through Aymond, 245 So. 3d 191 (La. App. 2 Cir.) (open-account interest and attorney-fee principles)
- Bank of Am., N.A. v. Green, 249 So. 3d 219 (La. App. 2 Cir.) (burden-shifting and proof requirements on open-account claims)
- Capital One Bank (USA) NA v. Thompson, 115 So. 3d 704 (La. App. 2 Cir. 2013) (creditor prima facie proof and debtor’s burden to show credits)
- Heritage Worldwide, Inc. v. Jimmy Swaggart Ministries, 665 So. 2d 523 (La. App. 1 Cir. 1995) (no double recovery of judicial interest when contractual interest applies)
- Ken's Construction Co., Inc. v. Liles, 560 So. 2d 103 (La. App. 3 Cir. 1990) (limitations on awarding judicial interest in addition to contractual interest)