United States of America v. Lloyd

Filing 11

OPINION AND ORDER granting 9 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by District Judge Patrick J. Duggan. (MOre)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,

Civil Action No.
14-CV-12916

vs.
Honorable Patrick J. Duggan
MICHAEL L. LLOYD,
Defendant.
____________________________/
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This action was brought by Plaintiff the United States of America to recover
unpaid student loan proceeds from Defendant Michael L. Lloyd. Presently before
the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, filed on January 16, 2015.
Defendant has not filed a response to the motion, and the time to do so has expired.
For the reasons that follow, the Court will grant the motion.
On June 4, 1979, January 7, 1981, and April 14, 1981, Defendant signed
promissory notes to secure student loans from the First Federal Savings & Loan
Association of Detroit in the amounts of $2,000, $500, and $2,500, respectively.
Def. Ex. 1. Each loan was distributed on the date on which Defendant signed the
promissory notes, at 7.00% interest per annum. Def. Ex. 2. The loans were
guaranteed by the Michigan Higher Education Assistance Authority and reinsured

by the U.S. Department of Education.

Id.

Defendant defaulted on his loan

obligations on September 1, 1988 and, after the guarantor was unable to collect the
amounts due from Defendant, it assigned the loan to the U.S. Department of
Education on July 26, 1994.

Id.

Since assignment of the loan, the U.S.

Department of Education has credited a total of $3,505.82 in payments from all
sources. Id. After application of these credits, Defendant owes $5,180.11 in
principal, together with interest in the amount of $5,188.56 as of August 2, 2013,
for a total of $10,368.67. Id.
The pertinent legal framework for adjudicating Plaintiff’s claim in this case
has been set forth by the Sixth Circuit as follows:
To recover on a promissory note the government must first make a
prima facie showing that (1) the defendant signed it, (2) the
government is the present owner or holder and (3) the note is in
default. For that purpose the government may introduce evidence of
the note and a sworn transcript of the account or certificate of
indebtedness. Once such a prima facie case is established, defendant
has the burden of proving the nonexistence, extinguishment or
variance in payment of the obligation.
United States v. Petroff-Kline, 557 F.3d 285, 290 (6th Cir. 2009) (citations
omitted).

Here, Plaintiff has satisfied its prima facie burden through the

submission of the promissory notes and a certificate of indebtedness. Although
Defendant has appeared in this case and filed an answer to the complaint, he has
failed to respond to Plaintiff’s summary judgment motion and has therefore failed

2

to meet his “burden of proving the nonexistence, extinguishment or variance in
payment of the obligation.” Id.
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is GRANTED.

Date: February 20, 2015
s/PATRICK J. DUGGAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies to:
Andrea A. Enright, Esq.
Harold R. Smith, Esq.

3