Ted Kaldis AKA Ted Lefteris Kaldis v. Crest Finance, 01-14-00571-CV

Appellant Ted Kaldis (aka Ted Lefteris Kaldis) appeals the trial court’s May 22, 2014 final judgment in favor of appellee Crest Finance, seeking a take-nothing judgment.
The underlying suit was for nonpayment of debt on a line of credit; Crest filed suit December 3, 2012 to recover the debt.
Appellant contends the claim accrued upon default in early September 2008 (last payment Aug. 7, 2008; next payment due Sept. 4–5, 2008).
Appellant argues the four-year statute of limitations for breach/debt actions (Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §16.004(a)(3)) expired before Crest filed suit.
Crest allegedly relied at trial on theories applicable to suits on sworn account; Appellant says the case is a straightforward breach/nonpayment action, not a sworn-account claim.
Appellant objects to portions of Crest’s appellate brief discussing regulated lending (TILA) for failing to cite authority and including TILA in the appendix as required by rule.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Crest’s claim is time-barred by the four-year statute of limitations	Crest (appellee) argues accrual may be governed by the date dealings ceased (invoking §16.004(c))	Kaldis (appellant) argues cause of action accrued at default (Sept. 2008) and Crest filed after the four-year limitation	Trial court judgment for Crest should be reversed because, per appellant, the claim accrued at default and suit was filed too late
Proper characterization of the claim (sworn account vs. breach of debt)	Crest relied on theories/forms applicable to suits on sworn account at trial	Kaldis contends the suit was a debt/breach action and thus different law governs accrual	Appellant argues trial court applied wrong legal framework (sworn account) and decision should be reversed
Accrual date for a line-of-credit debt	Crest suggests accrual may be when dealings ceased	Kaldis asserts accrual occurred when default happened (after missed payment due Sept. 2008)	Appellant relies on precedent holding accrual on default for lines of credit; thus claim accrued in Sept. 2008
Appellee’s regulated lending/TILA arguments on appeal	Crest raised regulated-lending/TILA issues in its brief	Kaldis objects that Crest failed to properly cite or include TILA in the appendix as required, preventing meaningful response	Appellant asks court to disregard Crest’s regulated-lending arguments for noncompliance with appellate rules

Barker v. Eckman, 213 S.W.3d 306 (Tex. 2006) (accrual principles for breach actions)
Dodeka, L.L.C. v. Campos, 377 S.W.3d 726 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2012) (breach occurs after missed payment; accrual timing for contract claims)