Endsley v. Robins Fed. Credit Union

Atari A. Endsley appeals from the trial court’s judgment entered on his claims for wrongful repossession of an automobile financed by Robins Federal Credit Union Robins and damage to his credit as a result. The trial court granted summary judgment to Robins on the issue of the legality of the repossession and the damage to credit claim. The remaining issue of the commercial reasonableness of the sale of the collateral was tried in a bench trial, resulting in the trial court’s finding that the sale was conducted in a commercially reasonable manner. Endsley also challenges the finding of commercial reasonableness.

To prevail on a motion for summary judgment, the moving party must demonstrate that there is no genuine issue of material fact, and that the undisputed facts, viewed in a light most favorable to the party opposing the motion, warrant judgment as a matter of law. OCGA § 9-11-56 c; Lau’s Corp. v. Haskins , 261 Ga. 491 405 SE2d 474 1991. “Our review of a grant of summary judgment is de novo, and we view the evidence and all reasonable inferences drawn from it in the light most favorable to the nonmovant.” Footnote omitted. Smith v. Bulloch County Bd. of Commrs. , 261 Ga. App. 667 583 SE2d 475 2003.