Melman v. FIA Card Services, N.A.
312 Ga. App. 270
Ga. Ct. App.2011Background
- FIA sued Melman in July 2008 for $38,560 on an account.
- FIA moved for summary judgment and relied on a sworn operation analyst's affidavit and attached records.
- Exhibits included a credit card agreement (Exhibit 1) and credit card statements (Exhibit 2) showing Melman’s balance.
- Melman answered generally denying the debt and challenged the evidence and records.
- The trial court granted summary judgment to FIA; Melman appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Are the exhibits admissible as business records? | Melman | Melman | Exhibits admissible as business records |
| Did FIA attach all papers referenced in the affidavit as required by OCGA § 9-11-56(e)? | FIA | Melman | Sufficient attachments; not required to attach every paper |
| Are discrepancies about account number/creditor name precluding summary judgment? | Melman | Melman | Arguments raised too late; records support debt; no error |
Key Cases Cited
- League v. Citibank, 291 Ga.App. 866 (2008) (summary judgment for creditor proper with proper records)
- Davis v. Discover Bank, 277 Ga.App. 864 (2006) (creditor proof of debt via issued card, terms, and statements)
- Ishak v. First Flag Bank, 283 Ga.App. 517 (2007) (business records admissibility and foundation)
- Taquechel v. Chattahoochee Bank, 260 Ga. 755 (1991) (balance evidence on summary judgment context)
- Intl. Business Consulting v. First Union Nat. Bank, 192 Ga.App. 742 (1989) (records as witness of account correctness)