A Texas appellate court has affirmed a trial court’s summary judgment in favor of a credit card issuer on a breach of contract claim, finding the bank conclusively established its entitlement to judgment and the defendant failed to raise any genuine issue of material fact over a collection lawsuit that it filed to recover an unpaid debt.
The background: The lender issued a credit card to the defendant in 2020. After she fell behind on payments, the bank sued in 2023 to recover an outstanding balance of $10,880.96.
- The defendant answered by filing a letter addressed to the lender’s chief executive officer. Nearly a year later, when the bank moved for summary judgment, she filed no written response.
- At the summary judgment hearing, she argued that she had submitted a money order for the full balance to the IRS and had made payments “to her trust.” The lender’s attorney told the court no payments had ever been received and that the company had no connection to the IRS or Treasury as a payment source.
- The trial court granted summary judgment at the end of the hearing, awarding Discover $10,880.96 plus post-judgment interest and $441.85 in costs.
- The defendant appealed, raising 19 issues, most of which were questions directed at the lender’s attorney rather than challenges to the trial court’s ruling. Her brief cited statutes related to bank reporting, government debt, credit unions, and the Uniform Commercial Code, none of which apply to a credit card breach of contract claim.
The ruling: The Court of Appeals affirmed. Chief Justice Darlene Byrne wrote the opinion on behalf of a three-judge panel.
- The court construed the defendant’s scattered arguments as a single issue: whether the lender’s summary judgment evidence was legally sufficient to establish all elements of its breach of contract claim.
- On the hearsay objection to the lender’s business records affidavit, the court found the complaint was a defect of form that was not preserved because she never raised a written objection in the trial court.
- On the missing signed application, the court noted the defendant did not deny signing it, and the Cardmember Agreement made clear that using the card constituted acceptance of its terms. Her account statements showed she had done exactly that.
- On the IRS payment and debt collector arguments, the court found those issues were raised for the first time on appeal and had not been presented to the trial court, and therefore could not serve as grounds for reversal.
- The lender’s uncontroverted evidence, including a business records affidavit, the Cardmember Agreement, and the final account statement showing the $10,880.96 balance, conclusively established each element of the breach of contract claim. Once that burden was met, the burden shifted to the defendant to raise a fact issue, which she failed to do.
- The summary judgment was affirmed.
