First Tower Loan, LLC d/b/a Tower Loan of Winnfield v. Laci Horton

• Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal
• Decided: May 21, 2025
• Docket: 56,238-CA
• Status: Published

Opinion

Judgment rendered May 21, 2025. Application for rehearing may be filed within the delay allowed by Art. 2166, La. C.C.P.

No. 56,236-CA No. 56,238-CA (Consolidated Cases)

COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA

***** FIRST TOWER LOAN, LLC Plaintiff-Appellant D/B/A TOWER LOAN OF WINNFIELD versus

ROY COMBS Defendant-Appellee *****

consolidated with

***** FIRST TOWER LOAN, LLC Plaintiff-Appellant D/B/A TOWER LOAN OF WINNFIELD

versus

LACI HORTON, A/K/A LACI Defendant-Appellee SHAYNE HORTON ***** Appealed from the Eighth Judicial District Court for the Parish of Winn, Louisiana Trial Court Nos. 47,276 and 47,404

Honorable Anastasia S. Wiley, Judge ***** ROGERS, CARTER & PAYNE, LLC Counsel for Appellant By: Jessica L. Greber

LACI HORTON, A/K/A LACI In Proper Person SHAYNE HORTON *****

Before STONE, MARCOTTE, and ELLENDER, JJ. ELLENDER, J.

In these consolidated cases, First Tower Loan LLC, d/b/a Tower Loan

of Winnfield, appeals 15 default judgments in which the district court

rendered judgments for amounts different from those alleged in the petitions,

verified in the affidavits of correctness, and stated in the proposed

judgments. For the reasons expressed, we amend the judgments to conform

to the records and, as amended, render. A separate opinion is issued for each

borrower.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Laci Horton, a/k/a Laci Shayne Horton, of Dodson, La., took out a

loan (Loan #1) from Tower Loan on December 22, 2021. The amount

financed was $1,509.74, at a stated APR of 23.99%, requiring Horton to

make 24 payments of $79.82 each, for a total of $1,915.68. Her final

payment was to be December 21, 2024, but, according to Tower Loan’s

petition, her last payment was on March 15, 2023, leaving a balance of

$829.19.

Horton took out a second loan (Loan #2) from Tower Loan on April 5,

2022. The amount financed was $1,702.74, at a stated APR of 39.48%,

requiring her to make 26 payments of $99.00 each, for a total of $2,574.00.

Her final payment was to be June 10, 2024, but, according to Tower Loan’s

petition, her last payment was on March 15, 2023, leaving a balance of

$1,333.30.

Tower Loan filed this suit on October 10, 2023. On Loan #1, it

sought the unpaid balance of $829.19, together with contractual interest of

23.99% per annum for one year beginning August 28, 2023, and 18% thereafter. On Loan #2, it sought the unpaid balance of $1,333.30, together

with contractual interest of 35.31% per annum for one year beginning

August 28, 2023, and 18% thereafter. The petition also prayed for late

charges, court costs, collection costs, contractual attorney fees, and a

recognition of its security interest in the movables described in the loan

agreements.

Horton filed no responsive pleading, so Tower Loan moved for

default judgment. In support, it attached an affidavit of correctness executed

by Anthony Barnes, an officer of the company, verifying that the balance

due on Loan #1 was $829.19 and that the interest rate, under the loan

agreement, was 23.99% for one year beginning August 28, 2023, and 18%

thereafter until paid in full. Barnes further verified that on Loan #2 the

balance due was $1,333.30 and that the interest rate, under the loan

agreement, was 35.31% for one year beginning August 28, 2023, and 18%

thereafter until paid in full. Tower Loan also provided a proposed judgment

stating these balances due and interest rates, and other matters not germane

to this appeal.

The district court rendered judgment as prayed for, by judgment date-

stamped February 1, 2024. However, on July 15, 2024, the only minute

entry in the record, the court “reviewed record and signed judgment.” In the

transcript, the court merely referred to the docket number and caption,

adding, “Okay, I’m returning the same to the clerk.” The court left the

principal balances intact but drew a line through the interest rates of

23.99%/18% and 35.31%/18% and handwrote over them “legal” interest.

Tower Loan has appealed, raising four assignments of error. Horton

has not filed a brief. 2 DISCUSSION

Compliance with Art. 1702

By its first assignment of error, Tower Loan urges the court erred in

failing to accept Tower Loan’s affidavit of correctness, submitted in support

of the proposed judgment, as prima facie proof of the indebtedness owed

under the promissory note, as required by La. C.C.P. art. 1701(B)(3). By its

second assignment, Tower Loan urges the court erred in failing either to sign

the proposed default judgment or direct that a hearing be held, as required by

La. C.C.P. art. 1702(C).

For the reasons expressed in First Tower Loan v. Combs, 56,236 (La.

App. 2 Cir. 5/21/25), rendered this day, this assignment has merit. The

district court lacked authority to disregard the affidavit of correctness and

erred in not signing the proposed judgment.

Award of Interest

By its third assignment of error, Tower Loan urges the court erred in

failing to award interest as prayed for and as mandated by La. C.C. art. 1921.

By its fourth assignment, Tower Loan urges the court erred in reducing

interest in the judgment to “legal interest” from the amount stated in the loan

agreements, contrary to La. R.S. 9:3519 and 9:3522. For the reasons

expressed in First Tower Loan v. Combs, supra, these assignments have

merit.

The loan agreement in Loan #1 states that the amount financed was

$1,509.74. Under R.S. 9:3519, Tower Loan could charge interest of 27% on

the portion of the principal that exceeds $1,400 (this portion would be

$109.74) and 36% on the remaining portion of $1,400. The affidavit states

that these rates, properly apportioned, yield a contractual rate of 23.99%. 3 The loan agreement in Loan #2 states that the amount financed was

$1,702.74. Under R.S. 9:3519, Tower Loan could charge interest of 27% on

the portion of the principal that exceeds $1,400 (this portion would be

$302.74) and 36% on the remaining portion of $1,400. The affidavit states

that these rates, properly apportioned, yield a contractual rate of 35.31%.

The affidavit further states that both loans were accelerated on August 28,

2023; hence, after August 28, 2024, the interest cannot exceed 18%. In

short, the interest rates prayed for in petition, and stated in the proposed

judgment, comply with the applicable law.

The district court lacked authority to award interest different from that

stated in the loan agreements, the petition, and the affidavit. The judgment

will be amended to provide the contractual and legal rates.

DECREE

For the reasons expressed, the principal and interest stated in the

judgment are amended as follows:

IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that there be judgment herein in favor of plaintiff, FIRST TOWER LOAN, LLC, d/b/a TOWER LOAN OF WINNFIELD, and against the defendant, LACI HORTON, a/k/a LACI SHAYNE HORTON (SSN XXX-XX-6147), in the amount of $829.19, together with interest thereon at the rate of 23.99% per annum for one year beginning August 28, 2023, and 18% thereafter, until paid; AND in the amount of $1,333.30, together with interest at the rate of 35.31% per annum for one year beginning August 28, 2023, and 18% thereafter, until paid.

In all other respects, the judgment is affirmed. All costs are to be paid

by the borrower, Laci Horton, a/k/a Laci Shayne Horton.

AMENDED, AFFIRMED AS AMENDED, AND RENDERED.