CRAZY CIVIL COURT ← Back
CREEK COUNTY • CS-2026-00262

LVNV Funding LLC v. Cheryl Andrews

Filed: Mar 18, 2026
Type: CS

What's This Case About?

Let’s get one thing straight: someone is suing a woman in Oklahoma for $3,377.72—yes, down to the penny—because she didn’t pay off a credit card… and the company suing her isn’t even the bank that gave her the card. This isn’t a typo. It’s not a prank. It’s just another Tuesday in America’s wild, Wild West of debt collection, where your unpaid Target credit card balance can end up in the hands of a Delaware-registered LLC you’ve never heard of, represented by a law firm that sends out lawsuits like spam emails. Welcome to Crazy Civil Court, where the stakes are low, the paperwork is high, and the plot twists are all in the fine print.

So who are these people? On one side, we’ve got Cheryl Andrews, a regular resident of Creek County, Oklahoma—no attorney listed, which means she’s probably flying solo in this legal rodeo. On the other side? LVNV Funding LLC, which sounds like a tech startup but is actually a professional debt buyer. These guys don’t issue credit cards. They don’t offer loans. What they do is buy up mountains of defaulted debt—your forgotten medical bills, your abandoned retail store cards, your “I thought that expired” credit lines—for pennies on the dollar, then sue to collect the full amount. It’s like buying a dumpster full of old electronics for $20 and then suing everyone who ever owned a broken iPhone. Ruthless? Maybe. Legal? Unfortunately, yes.

And the original creditor in this saga? Credit One Bank, N.A.—the same folks who brought you those late-night infomercials promising a credit card “even with bad credit!” (Spoiler: the interest rate is 29.99%, and the credit limit is $300.) According to the filing, Cheryl opened an account with them back on October 26, 2022. Somewhere along the way, she stopped paying. Default happened. The account got written off. Then—plot twist—it was sold. Not just once, but twice. First, it went to Credit Asset Sales LLC (another debt buyer with a name like a rejected Transformers character), which bundled it into “Portfolio 45184” (sounds like a spy mission, but it’s just a spreadsheet of bad debts). Then, on February 18, 2025—yes, 2025, which means this lawsuit was filed after the alleged sale—LVNV Funding bought the whole portfolio, including Cheryl’s $3,377.72 tab. And now, they’re not just asking for their money back—they’re asking a judge to order her to pay it, plus interest, court costs, and attorney’s fees. All because she once swiped a Credit One card for, let’s be honest, probably Amazon Prime and gas.

Now, you might be wondering: how does a company that wasn’t even part of the original deal have the right to sue someone? Great question. That’s where the “assignment” comes in—the legal paperwork that says, “Hey, we sold this debt, and now you own it.” LVNV claims they have that documentation, and they’ve attached an affidavit from one Andy Valdez, an “Authorized Representative” (title so vague it could mean anything from CEO to office intern), swearing that yes, the records show Cheryl owes this money, and yes, they now own the right to collect it. They even claim they sent her a demand letter more than 30 days ago—standard procedure before filing suit. But here’s the kicker: nowhere in this filing does it say what she bought, why she stopped paying, or whether she disputes the debt at all. Did she lose her job? Was there a billing error? Did she forget to update her address and never see the bills? We don’t know. This isn’t a trial. It’s a petition—a legal formality that says, “We think she owes us money, and we want a judge to make her pay.” If Cheryl doesn’t respond, LVNV wins by default. If she does, then—and only then—does this turn into an actual fight.

So what does LVNV want? $3,377.72. That’s the number. To some, that’s a car payment. To others, it’s a vacation. To someone in Creek County, Oklahoma, it might be three months of rent. It’s not a trivial sum, but it’s also not a fortune—especially for a company that likely paid maybe $300 for the entire debt. That’s the absurdity of the debt-buying industry: you can acquire thousands of defaulted accounts for pennies, then sue for the full amount, hire a law firm on contingency (meaning they only get paid if they win), and rake in profits while hiding behind corporate layers and legal jargon. And let’s talk about that law firm: Love, Beal & Nixon, P.C.—a firm that, according to public records, files hundreds of these debt collection lawsuits every year. Their attorney on this case, William L. Nixon, Jr., is listed as representing LVNV, along with six other attorneys on the same petition. Six! It’s like they’re sending an army to collect a bar tab.

Now, here’s where we give you our take—because let’s be real, we’re not lawyers, we’re storytellers with opinions. And our opinion is this: there’s something deeply unromantic about a company suing someone for $3,377.72 in 2025 over a credit card opened in 2022, using an affidavit signed on the same day the lawsuit was filed, by a guy named Andy Valdez who we know nothing about except that he works for the plaintiff and once had a notary watch him sign a document. Is the debt real? Maybe. Is Cheryl Andrews legally obligated to pay it? Possibly. But is it fair that a third-party investor can buy someone’s financial mistake, then weaponize the court system to collect it—complete with attorney’s fees and interest—while the original lender walks away unscathed? That’s where the system starts to smell like week-old leftovers.

We’re not saying people shouldn’t pay their debts. But we are saying that when a lawsuit like this gets filed with the emotional weight of a parking ticket and the legal machinery of a corporate takeover, something’s off. Where’s the conversation? The negotiation? The humanity? And let’s not forget: this case was filed in November 2025—a date that, at the time of this writing, hasn’t even happened yet. Either we’ve time-traveled, or someone’s paperwork is very ahead of schedule. (Okay, fine, it’s probably a typo in the data—but it adds to the surreal vibe.)

So who are we rooting for? Honestly? We’re rooting for Cheryl Andrews to at least show up. To file an answer. To ask for proof. To make them prove this debt is hers, that it was properly assigned, that the math adds up. Because if no one pushes back, the machine just keeps grinding. And next time, it might be your name on the docket—for a debt you don’t remember, sold to a company you’ve never heard of, suing you for a number that ends in .72 cents.

Welcome to the American debt circus. Popcorn’s on us.

Case Overview

$3,378 Demand Petition
Jurisdiction
District Court, Oklahoma
Relief Sought
$3,378 Monetary
Plaintiffs
Defendants
Claims
# Cause of Action Description
1 petition for indebtedness collection of debt

Petition Text

547 words
25-50331-0 ZH1 010 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF CREEK COUNTY STATE OF OKLAHOMA LVNV Funding LLC, Plaintiff, vs. Cheryl Andrews, Defendant. PETITION FOR INDEBTEDNESS COMES NOW the Plaintiff, by and through its undersigned attorneys who hereby enter their appearance herein, and for its cause of action against the defendants alleges and states as follows: 1. Credit One Bank, N.A., provided credit to the defendant on account number XXXXXXXXXXXX8715. The Defendant defaulted on the obligation. The account has been assigned to Plaintiff. 2. Defendant owes Plaintiff $3,377.72. An Affidavit of Account and/or contract is attached hereto and incorporated by reference. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for Judgment against the Defendant in the sum of $3,377.72, with interest at the statutory rate from the date of judgment, all court costs and a reasonable attorney's fee, and for such other relief as the Court may deem just and proper. William L. Nixon, Jr., #012804 Harley L. Homjak, #019736 Gracelyn Porras Dillingham, #35852 Jenifer A. Gani, #021876 Daniela Westfahl, #36242 Mariah S. Ellicott, #36309 Benjamin F. Brackett, #36580 LOVE, BEAL & NIXON, P.C. Attorney for Plaintiff P.O. Box 32738 Oklahoma City, OK 73123 Telephone: 405-720-0565 E-Mail: [email protected] IN THE DISTRICT COURT IN THE DISTRICT IN AND FOR CREEK COUNTY, OK LVNV Funding LLC Plaintiff vs. Cheryl Andrews Defendant(s) PLAINTIFF'S AFFIDAVIT OF INDEBTEDNESS AND OWNERSHIP OF ACCOUNT I am an Authorized Representative for LVNV Funding LLC (hereafter the "Plaintiff"), and hereby certify as follows: 1. I have personal knowledge regarding Plaintiff's creation and maintenance of its normal business records, including computer records of its accounts receivable. This information is regularly and contemporaneously maintained during the course of Plaintiff's business. I am authorized to execute this affidavit on behalf of Plaintiff and the information below is true and correct based on the Plaintiff's business records. 2. In the regular course of business, Plaintiff regularly acquires revolving credit accounts, installment accounts, service accounts, and/or other credit lines or obligations. The records provided to Plaintiff at the time of acquisition are represented to include information provided by the original creditor and/or its successors-in-interest. Such information includes the debtor's name and social security number, the account balance, the identity of the original creditor and the account number. 3. Based on the business records maintained on account XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX8715 (hereafter, the "Account"), which are a compilation of the information provided to Plaintiff upon acquisition and information obtained since acquisition, the Account is the result of the extension of credit to Cheryl Andrews by Credit One Bank, N.A. on or about 10/26/2022. Said business records further indicate that the Account was then owned by Credit Asset Sales LLC. Credit Asset Sales LLC later sold and/or assigned Portfolio 45184, which included the Defendant's Account, to Plaintiff or Plaintiff's predecessor(s)-in-interest on 02/18/2025. Thereafter, all ownership rights were assigned to, transferred to and became vested in Plaintiff, including the right to collect the balance owing of $3,377.72 plus any legally permissible interest. 4. Based on the business records maintained in regard to the Account, the above stated amount is justly and duly owed by the Defendant to the Plaintiff and all just and lawful offsets, payments and credits to the Account have been allowed. Demand for payment was made more than thirty days ago. __________________________________________ Andy Valdez November 25, 2025 The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me by the above-signed on Tuesday, November 25, 2025. __________________________________________ (Notary Public)
Disclaimer: This content is sourced from publicly available court records. Crazy Civil Court is an entertainment platform and does not provide legal advice. We are not lawyers. All information is presented as-is from public filings.