Court of Appeals of Ohio, Seventh District, Mahoning
Appeal from Mahoning County Area Court No. 4 of Mahoning
County, Ohio Case No. 16CVF1003
PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE ATTORNEY KRISHNA K. VELAYUDHAN
DEFENDANT-APPELLANT MONICA S. TAYLOR, PRO SE
Gene Donofrio Hon. Cheryl L. Waite Hon. Carol Ann Robb
Defendant-appellant, Monica Taylor, appeals from a Mahoning
County Area Court No. 4 judgment granting summary judgment in
favor of plaintiff-appellee, Cavalry SPV I, LLC, and entering
judgment against appellant in the amount of $951.34.
On November 15, 2016, appellee filed a complaint against
appellant. The complaint alleged that appellee was the
assignee of appellant's Citibank, NA (Citibank) credit
card account (the account). The complaint further alleged
that appellant failed to pay on the credit card account as
required. It alleged that appellant owed the sum of $951.43
on the account. To its complaint, appellee attached copies of
credit card statements listing appellant as the owner of the
account and the sum of $951.43 due and owing.
Appellant, acting pro se, filed an answer admitting she is
the owner of the account but denying that she owed any
balance. Instead, appellant stated in her answer that she
paid off the account in full in February 2012, and had not
used the account since that time. She further stated she had
not received any correspondence from appellee except for the
complaint. Appellant attached two email receipts to her
answer showing payments to Citibank in the amounts of $686.70
on February 14, 2012, and $9.58 on March 11, 2012.
Next, appellee filed a motion for summary judgment. Appellee
attached the affidavit of one of its agents, Cyrenna
Dewhurst. Dewhurst averred that appellee's business
records provided the following. Appellee purchased
appellant's account from Citibank on or about March 31,
2016. Appellant opened the account on January 2, 2007, and
the account was "charged off" on December 26, 2013.
As of September 27, 2016, appellee's records revealed
that appellant owed a balance of $951.34.
Appellant did not file a response to appellee's summary
The trial court granted appellee's motion for summary
judgment. It noted that appellant did not file a response to
the motion and found that no genuine issue of material fact
existed. Therefore, the trial court entered judgment in favor
of appellee in the amount of $951.34, plus interest.
Appellant, still acting pro se, filed a timely notice of
appeal on June 6, 2017.
Appellant now raises two assignments of error. Appellee has
failed to file a brief in this matter.
An appellate court reviews the granting of summary judgment
de novo. Comer v. Risko,106 Ohio St.3d 185,
2005-Ohio-4559, 833 N.E.2d 712, ¶ 8. Thus, we shall
apply the same test as the ...