History
  • No items yet
midpage
FAS Capital, LLC v. Carr
7 F. Supp. 3d 1259
N.D. Ga.
2014
Read the full case

Background

  • June 2005 promissory note to Silverton Bank for $250,150; September 2008 second promissory note for $358,000; FDIC became receiver after bank failure in 2009; defendant defaulted on both notes; FDIC sued September 2011 and later sold/ transferred notes to FAS Capital; court allowed substitution of FAS Capital as plaintiff June 26, 2012; plaintiff moves for summary judgment but defendant challenges federal jurisdiction post‑FDIC dismissal and evidence of holder and balances; court denied summary judgment without prejudice to cure the balance history and affidavits; court also addressed attorney’s fees under OCGA § 13‑1‑11.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Jurisdiction after FDIC dismissal FDIC–as original plaintiff–established federal question jurisdiction under § 1819; jurisdiction remains after substitution. Jurisdiction ends when FDIC is dismissed and only private party remains. Court held original jurisdiction under § 1819 remains; alternatively exercised supplemental jurisdiction under § 1367.
FDIC acquisition and transfer of notes FDIC acquired Silverton Bank’s assets as receiver under 12 U.S.C. § 1821 and transferred notes to FAS Capital. Insufficient evidence that FDIC actually held the notes or validly transferred them. Court found FDIC held notes and valid transfer to FAS Capital established; judicial notice of receivership facts allowed.
Holder of the notes and standing to sue FAS Capital current holder evidenced by Bill of Sale/Assignment and affidavits; notes in possession of FAS Capital. Documents unauthenticated; insufficient proof of current holder. Court found FAS Capital is the current holder based on competent evidence of possession and authentication.
Amount due on the notes History statements and deposition evidence establish principal and amounts due; plaintiff to cure deficiencies. Notes’ terms and evidence create genuine issues of material fact as to exact balances and fees. Court denied summary judgment without prejudice for resubmission of accurate history statements and affidavits; if cured, may grant summary judgment.
Attorney’s fees under OCGA § 13-1-11 Notice to pay attorney’s fees satisfied; complaint provides notice; demand letters indicate maturity. Disputed whether notice met statutory requirements for second note. Court found notice sufficient under Georgia law and awarded fees for second note; but overall outcome contingent on cure of other issues.

Key Cases Cited

  • Pollard v. First Nat'l Bank of Albany, 169 Ga.App. 598, 313 S.E.2d 785 (1984) (Ga. App. 1984) (debt default establishes prima facie case for recovery)
  • Shropshire v. Alostar Bank, of Commerce, 314 Ga.App. 310, 724 S.E.2d 33 (2012) (Ga. App. 2012) (liability on a note established by execution; burden shifts to debtor to raise defenses)
  • Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 106 S. Ct. 2548 (1986) (U.S. 1986) (summary judgment standard; burden on movant to show absence of evidence)
  • Neivman-Green, Inc. v. Alfonzo-Larrain, 490 U.S. 826 (1989) (U.S. 1989) (jurisdictional principles in federal courts)
  • Four Star Holding Corp., 178 F.3d 97 (2d Cir. 1999) (2d Cir. 1999) (continuation of federal jurisdiction after FDIC dismissal under § 1819; policy reasons)
  • Lindley v. FDIC, 733 F.3d 1043 (11th Cir. 2013) (11th Cir. 2013) ( Eleventh Circuit: jurisdiction not lost if FDIC is later dismissed; maintains original jurisdiction for related claims)
  • Kroger Co. v. U.S. Foodservice of Atlanta, Inc., 270 Ga.App. 525, 607 S.E.2d 177 (2004) (Ga. App. 2004) (notice under § 13-1-11 may be satisfied by multiple documents; material misstatement not fatal)
  • Carnegie-Mellon Univ. v. Cohill, 484 U.S. 343, 108 S. Ct. 614 (1988) (U.S. 1988) (federal-question jurisdiction; discretionary dismissal when state claims predominate)
  • Hardy v. Birmingham Bd. of Educ., 954 F.2d 1546 (11th Cir. 1992) (11th Cir. 1992) (factors for declining jurisdiction under supplemental jurisdiction)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: FAS Capital, LLC v. Carr
Court Name: District Court, N.D. Georgia
Date Published: Mar 20, 2014
Citation: 7 F. Supp. 3d 1259
Docket Number: Civil Action No. 1:11-cv-3224-JEC
Court Abbreviation: N.D. Ga.