Perhaps suffering from buyer's remorse, Lavinia Roy sued Kinsel Ford last April, alleging the company misrepresented her annual percentage rate after buying a vehicle from the local dealership.
A year later, Kinsel is fighting for summary judgment, contending that in one year's time Roy has failed to produce any evidence that the company committed fraud.
Court papers show that on June 22, 2005, Roy and Kinsel entered into a retail installment contract. A salesperson sat down with her and went over all the paperwork before signing.
However, in her suit Roy alleges Kinsel failed to tell her "that the approved APR may be different than that which appears in plaintiff's contract ... and may include a 'spread' added by defendant."
"The defendant secured the execution of documents through deception of a felony grade," the suit says, adding that such deception entitles her to punitive and exemplary damages.
Kinsel contends in its summary judgment motion, filed Feb. 5, that adequate time for discovery has passed and yet Roy has failed to produce any substantial evidence.
"Plaintiff cannot present more than a scintilla of admissible evidence to support even one of (her claims)," the motion states. "Summary judgment is appropriate with respect to plaintiff's claims of fraud against Kinsel Ford."
A hearing on the matter has been slated for May 28 in Judge Donald Floyd's 172nd District Court.
Kinsel is represented by attorney Clay White of the White Shaver law firm in Houston.
Roy is represented by attorney Jeffrey Weinstein of Athens, Texas.
Case No. E183-420