Matthew D. Wiggins, Jr v. Christopher J. Janousek and Madeleine M. Griffin, 14-16-00801-CV

Wiggins sued Janousek and Griffin on a promissory note, alleging maturity on April 1, 2010; suit filed January 14, 2015.
The note recites a $55,000 principal payable to Wiggins with 10% annual interest and a “Total amount due on 4/1/10” handwritten phrase.
Handwritten terms state: interest accrues only after a cash-advance date and interest is payable monthly; typed terms allow partial prepayments (applied first to interest) and permit prepayment without penalty.
Defendants pleaded the affirmative defense that the claim is barred by the four-year statute of limitations applicable to non-negotiable instruments.
Trial court denied Wiggins’s two traditional summary-judgment motions and granted defendants’ traditional summary judgment holding the note non-negotiable and the claim time-barred.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the note is a negotiable instrument	Note is an unconditional promise to pay $55,000 with interest, so negotiable	Note contemplates an unknown cash-advance date, partial prepayments, and future advances making principal not a "sum certain"	Note is non-negotiable because amount due and interest depend on facts not ascertainable from the instrument alone
Applicable statute of limitations	If negotiable, six-year limitations applies, so claim timely	If non-negotiable, four-year limitations applies and claim is barred	Four-year statute of limitations applies; Wiggins’s claim accrued 4/1/2010 and suit filed after four years, so time-barred

G & R Inv. v. Nance, 683 S.W.2d 727 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1984) (claim on note accrues at maturity)
Amberboy v. Societe de Banque Privee, 831 S.W.2d 793 (Tex. 1992) (purpose of the sum-certain requirement for negotiability)
FFP Marketing Co. v. Long Lane Master Trust, IV, 169 S.W.3d 402 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2005) (instrument is non-negotiable if maker’s liability is not determinable from the face of the note)
Diversified Fin. Sys., Inc. v. Hill, Heard, O’Neal, Gilstrap & Goetz, 99 S.W.3d 349 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2003) (revolving line-of-credit notes are non-negotiable)
Resolution Trust Corp. v. Oaks Apartments Joint Venture, 966 F.2d 995 (5th Cir. 1992) (note non-negotiable where principal is "or so much thereof as may be advanced")
KPMG Peat Marwick v. Harrison Cty. Hous. Fin. Corp., 988 S.W.2d 746 (Tex. 1999) (defendant moving for summary judgment on limitations must conclusively establish accrual)
Mann Frankfort Stein & Lipp Advisors, Inc. v. Fielding, 289 S.W.3d 844 (Tex. 2009) (summary-judgment review is de novo)