T. V. D. B. Sarl et al v. KAPLA USA, LP et al

Filing 77

ORDERED that the Court awards a total of $150,848.68 to T.V.D.B. SARL, and Kapla France SARL and directs the Clerk to enter judgment accordingly against KAPLA USA, LP, KAPLA USA GP, LLC and Citiblocs, LLC. The joint proposed pretrial order is due 1/24/14. Signed by Judge B. Avant Edenfield on 1/9/14. (wwp)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
SAVANNAH DIVISION
T.V.D.B. SARL; KAPLA FRANCE
SARL; and TOM'S TOYS, LLC,
Plaintiffs,
V

.

4:1 2-cv-230

KAPLA USA, LP; KAPLA USA GP,
LLC; CITIBLOCS, LLC; and
MARJORIE I. CHAYETTE,
Defendants.
i) 111) D
On December 16, 2013 • the Court
entered summary judgment in favor of
Plaintiffs T.V.D.B. Sari ("TVDB") and
Kapla France SARL ("Kapla") in the
amount of €61,769 for breach of contract.
ECF No. 72 at 3. The Court directed the
parties to submit briefs on the proper
conversion rate and interest rates for this
sum. Id. The parties complied, ECF Nos.
75; 76, and the Court now awards the sum of
$150,848.68 to TVDB and Kapla.
Both parties agree that €6 1,769 in
dollars after conversion, prior to any
adjustment for interest, equals $78,918.18.
ECF Nos. 75 at 3; 76 at 5. The parties both
contend that the amounts of the individual
contracts should be converted at the
exchange rates of the dates of the respective
breaches, and the Court concludes this is the
proper method. ECF Nos. 75 at 1-3; 76 at 25; see Ventas, Inc. v. HCP, Inc., 647 F.3d
291, 322 (6th Cir. 2011) ("[hf the cause of
action arises under U.S. law, then the
conversion date is the date of injury.").

The parties disagree on the prejudgment
interest rate, with the Plaintiffs seeking the
special statutory rate of 18% per annum
under O.C.G.A. § 7-4-16, ECF No. 75 at 36, and Defendants arguing for the legal rate
of 7% under O.C.G.A. § 7-4-2, ECF No. 76
at 5-8.
O.C.G.A. § 7-4-16 states
Unless otherwise provided in writing
signed by the obligor, a commercial
account becomes due and payable
upon the date a statement of the
account is rendered to the obligor.
The owner of a commercial account
may charge interest on that portion
of a commercial account which has
been due and payable for 30 days or
more at a rate not in excess of 1 1/2
percent per month calculated on the
amount owed from the date upon
which it became due and payable
until paid.
The Defendants concede that the unpaid
invoices are commercial accounts as defined
in the statute. ECF No. 76 at 5 n.5. But
they base their objection to the 18% rate on
the Plaintiffs' failure to make "a pre-trial
invocation of the applicability of' § 7-4-16
until the summary judgment briefs) ECF
No. 76 at 5 (citing Gold Kist Peanuts v.

Defendants also contend that Plaintiffs failed to
make a liquidated demand on this account as required
by Georgia courts. ECF No. 76 at 7-8; see Electric

Works CMA, Inc. v. Baldwin Tech. Fabrics, LLC, 703
S.E.2d 124 (Ga. Ct. App. 2010). However, a
liquidated demand is also termed a liquidated claim,
which is defined as a "claim that has been determined
in a judicial proceeding." Black's Law Dictionary
282 (9th ed. 2009). Here, the Court has awarded a
liquidated amount of €61,769 or $78,918.18, so the
requirement is fulfilled.

R. Civ. P. 56(f) (granting the Court authority
to enter summary judgment independent of a
motion). The Court grants 18% annual
prejudgment interest as provided for in § 74-16.

Alberson, 342 S.E.2d 694, 697 (Ga. Ct. App.
1986)). The Defendants note that Georgia
courts have previously evaluated only four
categories of pretrial demands made
pursuant to the requirement of Gold Kist:
demands made in 1) the contract, invoice, or
other document evidencing the obligation
providing for the specific rate of interest; 2)
the pleadings; 3) a pretrial order; or 4) some
combination of these categories. ECF No.
76 at 6. They contend that those must be the
only four acceptable ways to make the
pretrial invocation. Id.

Applying the 18% interest rate to the
values of the unpaid contracts following
currency conversion, the Defendants owe a
total of $71,930.50 in prejudgment interest.
See ECF No. 75 at 6 (showing calculations).
The Court therefore AWARDS a total of
$150,848.68 to TVDB and Kapla and
DIRECTS the Clerk to enter judgment
accordingly against KAPLA USA, LP,
KAPLA USA GP, LLC, and CITIBLOCS,
LLC. See ECF No. 72 at 10-11 (holding
CITIBLOCS liable as a successor in interest
for the contractual debts of KAPLA USA).

The Defendants' argument fails because
Gold Kist does not limit the form of pretrial
demand. Just because Georgia courts have
so far only ruled that the four categories are
acceptable does not mean that other
categories of pretrial invocations are
unacceptable. Essentially, the Defendants
confuse a sufficient condition with a
necessary condition. That is, just because
Georgia courts have found each of the four
enumerated categories sufficient to fulfill
the requirement of Gold Kist does not mean
that one of those four is necessary to
properly invoke § 7-4-16.

This/! day of January 2014.

B. AVANT DENFIELD, J'GE -'
UNITED STATES DISTRI'f COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

Furthermore, Defendants' contention
that a demand for the 18% interest rate may
be made in the pretrial order, but not the
summary judgment briefs, is absurd,
because the proposed pretrial order
chronologically follows the filing of the
summary judgment briefs. If the Court
refused to award the 18% rate now and the
Plaintiffs demanded the rate in the pretrial
order,2 the Court could then award. See Fed.
2

The joint proposed pretrial order is due January 24,
2014. ECF No. 74.

2