Citizens Bank, N.A. v. Marcel Wisznia, et al

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
CITIZENS BANK, N.A. 	CIVIL ACTION
VERSUS 	NO: 25-1214
MARCEL WISZNIA ET AL. 	SECTION “H”
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is Plaintiff Citizen Bank N.A.’s Motion for Default
Judgment against Defendants (Doc. 12). For the following reasons, the Motion
is GRANTED.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff 	Citizen 	Bank, 	N.A. 	alleges 	that 	it 	entered 	into 	a 	Credit
Agreement and Revolving Demand Note (“the Loan”) with Defendant Wisznia
Company, Inc. (“WCI”) on December 9, 2022, providing WCI with a line of
credit in the amount of $250,000. As security for the Loan, Defendant Marcel
Wisznia signed a personal guaranty guaranteeing performance by WCI on the
Loan (“the Guaranty”). Plaintiff alleges that Defendants defaulted on their
obligations under the Loan and Guaranty. On June 13, 2025, Plaintiff filed this
action to collect on the unpaid amounts. Defendants were served on June 19,
2025, but have failed to make an appearance in this matter. The Clerk of Court
Case 2:25-cv-01214-JTM-MBN Document 15 Filed 03/24/26 Page 1 of 8

2
entered default on September 15, 2025. Plaintiff filed the instant Motion for
Default Judgment on December 23, 2025.
LEGAL STANDARD
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b) authorizes the clerk to make an
entry of default against defendants who fail to answer or otherwise defend a
plaintiff’s complaint within the required time period.1 An entry of default
results in a plaintiff’s well-pleaded factual allegations being deemed admitted.2
Nevertheless, a defendant against whom a default has been entered “is not
held to admit facts that are not well-pleaded or to admit conclusions of law.”3
Following the entry of default, a plaintiff may move for default judgment
against the defendant in default.4 “[A] defendant’s default does not in itself
warrant the court in entering a default judgment” as “[t]here must be a
sufficient 	basis 	in 	the 	pleadings 	for 	the 	judgment 	entered.”5 	Although
judgments by default are “generally disfavored,”6 the decision to enter default
judgment is within the sound discretion of the trial court.7
The Court is entitled to consider several factors when determining
whether to enter a default judgment, including:
1 FED. R. CIV. P. 55.
2 Meyer v. Bayles, 559 F. App’x 312, 313 (5th Cir. 2014) (citing Nishimatsu Const. Co.
v. Houston Nat. Bank, 515 F.2d 1200, 1206 (5th Cir. 1975)).
3 Nishimatsu, 515 F.2d at 1206.
4 FED. R. CIV. P. 55(b)(2).
5 Nishimatsu, 515 F.2d at 1206.
6 Lacy v. Sitel Corp., 227 F.3d 290, 292 (5th Cir. 2000).
7 Lewis v. Lynn, 236 F.3d 766, 767 (5th Cir. 2001) (citing Mason v. Lister, 562 F.2d
343, 345 (5th Cir. 1977)).
Case 2:25-cv-01214-JTM-MBN Document 15 Filed 03/24/26 Page 2 of 8

3
whether material issues of fact are at issue, whether there has
been substantial prejudice, whether the grounds for default are
clearly established, whether the default was caused by a good faith
mistake or excusable neglect, the harshness of a default judgment,
and whether the court would think itself obliged to set aside the
default on the defendant’s motion.8
The Fifth Circuit has acknowledged that an evidentiary hearing can be held
when 	the 	damages 	claimed 	are 	unliquidated.9 	However, 	an 	evidentiary
hearing is unnecessary when the amount of damages claimed is a liquidated
sum or an amount “capable of mathematical calculation.”10
LAW AND ANALYSIS
In order to enter a default judgment, the Court must first examine its
jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties before proceeding to the
merits of Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment.11
A. Subject Matter Jurisdiction
Subject 	matter 	jurisdiction 	in 	this 	case 	is 	premised 	on 	diversity
jurisdiction. 	Cases 	arising 	under 	§ 	1332 	require 	complete 	diversity 	of
citizenship and an amount in controversy exceeding $75,000.00. “The concept
of complete diversity requires that all persons on one side of the controversy
be citizens of different states than all persons on the other side.”12 Plaintiff
8 Lindsey v. Prive Corp., 161 F.3d 886, 893 (5th Cir. 1998).
9 James v. Frame, 6 F.3d 307, 310 (5th Cir. 1993).
10 Id.
11 Sys. Pipe & Supply, Inc. v. M/V VIKTOR KURNATOVSKIY, 242 F.3d 322, 324
(5th Cir. 2001).
12 McClaughlin v. Miss. Power Co., 376 F.3d 344, 353 (5th Cir.2004) (internal
quotation marks and citations omitted).
Case 2:25-cv-01214-JTM-MBN Document 15 Filed 03/24/26 Page 3 of 8

4
pleads that it is a national banking association with its main office in Rhode
Island.13 Defendant Marcel Wisznia is a resident of Louisiana, and WCI is a
Louisiana 	corporation 	with 	its 	principal 	place 	of 	business 	in 	Louisiana.
Accordingly, there is complete diversity. Further, the amount in controversy
exceeds $75,000 as discussed below. Therefore, this Court has subject matter
jurisdiction over this matter.
B. Personal Jurisdiction
Next, the Court must consider personal jurisdiction over Defendants.
Plaintiff’s Complaint contends that WCI is a Louisiana company operating out
of New Orleans, Louisiana and is therefore domiciled in Louisiana. Further,
Mr. Wisznia is a citizen of Louisiana. Accordingly, the Court has personal
jurisdiction over Defendants in their home state.
C. Venue
Finally, the Court must also consider whether the action has been
brought in an appropriate venue. “A civil action may be brought in a judicial
district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the
claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that is subject to the action is
situated.”14 Plaintiff alleges that the Loan and Guaranty documents were
executed in this district and the Defendants are domiciled in this district.
Accordingly, venue is proper here.
13 A national banking association is a citizen of the State in which its main office is
located. Wachovia Bank v. Schmidt, 546 U.S. 303, 303 (2006).
14 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2).
Case 2:25-cv-01214-JTM-MBN Document 15 Filed 03/24/26 Page 4 of 8

5
D. Plaintiff’s Claims
Having found that jurisdiction and venue are proper and noting that the
record reflects that Defendants were served with the summons and complaint
and have failed to appear, plead, or otherwise defend themselves in this action,
the Court may award a default judgment in Plaintiff’s favor if the facts alleged
in the Complaint constitute a legitimate cause of action.15 The Court must
therefore determine whether, accepting the well-pleaded factual allegations in
the Complaint as true, Plaintiff is entitled to a judgment against Defendants.
Plaintiff brings claims for breach of the Loan and Guaranty agreements.
Under Louisiana law, to prevail on a breach of contract claim, the plaintiff
must show that: 1) the defendant owed him an obligation; 2) the defendant
failed to perform the obligation; and 3) the defendant’s failure to perform
resulted in damage to the plaintiff.16 Considering Plaintiff’s Complaint and the
Loan and Guaranty documents, the Court finds a sufficient basis for the entry
of judgment on Plaintiff’s breach of contract claims.
Plaintiff has shown that WCI entered into the Loan agreement on
December 9, 2022 and received access to a line of credit in the amount of
$250,000.00 with an initial interest rate of 1.75% above the Wall Street
Journal Prime Rate. In the Loan, WCI agreed to make certain minimum
monthly payments, and the principal balance and accumulated interest were
15 See Farrell v. Landrieu, No. 14-0072, 2016 WL 1714227, at *2 (E.D. La. Apr. 1,
2016). 16 Hayes Fund for First United Methodist Church of Welsh, LLC v. Kerr-McGee Rocky
Mountain, LLC, 193 So. 3d 1110, 1115 (La. 2015).
Case 2:25-cv-01214-JTM-MBN Document 15 Filed 03/24/26 Page 5 of 8

6
payable to Plaintiff on demand. Mr. Wisznia signed the Guaranty on the same
date, agreeing to ensure the performance of WCI under the Loan.
Thereafter, WCI defaulted on the terms of the Loan by failing to make
monthly payments and failing to pay the balance in full upon demand. Plaintiff
served WCI and Mr. Wisznia with a notice of default on April 24, 2025. As of
November 20, 2025, Defendants owed a balance of $250,000.00 in principal,
$22,097.22 	in 	accrued 	interest, 	and 	$1,071.45 	in 	late 	charges. 	Interest
continues to accrue daily at a rate of $60.76.17 Accordingly, Plaintiff has shown
that Defendants entered into agreements with it, breached those agreements,
and have caused Plaintiff damages by failing to repay the amounts owed under
those agreements. Default Judgment is appropriate.
E. Attorney’s Fees
Plaintiff also contends that it is entitled to attorney’s fees under the
terms of the Loan and Guaranty agreements. In Louisiana, a prevailing party
may recover attorney’s fees where authorized by contract or statute.18 The
Loan requires WCI to pay costs and expenses incurred by Plaintiff in enforcing
the terms of the Loan.19 Likewise, the Guaranty states that Mr. Wisznia
17 In its Complaint, Plaintiff states that interest accrues at a rate of $64.24 per day.
However, the Motion and the Obligation Payoff attached as an exhibit thereto indicate a rate
of $60.76.
18 Abdelqader v. Ramos, 353 So. 3d 750, 762–63 (La. App. 4 Cir. 2022).
19 Doc. 12-2.
Case 2:25-cv-01214-JTM-MBN Document 15 Filed 03/24/26 Page 6 of 8

7
unconditionally guaranteed the payment of all sums due by WCI, including
attorney’s fees.20
“Attorney’s fees are based upon the legal work performed or to be
performed and must be reasonable.”21 Accordingly, the Court must determine
the reasonableness of the attorney’s fees and costs sought. To calculate an
attorney’s fees award, the district court first calculates the “lodestar.”22 The
lodestar is the product of the number of hours reasonably expended on the
litigation multiplied by a reasonable hourly billing rate.23 However, the Court
retains broad discretion in setting the appropriate award of attorney’s fees.24
Plaintiff reports that it has incurred attorney’s fees in the amount of
$3,298.00 and costs in the amount of $1,190.00. Plaintiff’s attorney represents
that he expended 6.8 hours at a rate of $485.00 in prosecuting this matter.
Having reviewed the billing records of Plaintiff’s attorney and the filings made
in this matter, the Court finds the hours expended and the hourly rate to be
reasonable. Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to attorney’s fees and costs in
those amounts.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, the Motion is GRANTED. Default judgment
shall be entered 	against 	Defendants 	Wisznia 	Company, 	Inc. 	and 	Marcel
Wisznia on Plaintiff Citizen Bank N.A.’s breach of contract claims in the
20 Id.
21 Abdelqader, 353 So. 3d at 762–63.
22 Forbush v. J.C. Penney Co., 98 F.3d 817, 821 (5th Cir. 1996).
23 Hensley v. Eckerhart, 61 U.S. 424, 433–34 (1983).
24 Id. at 437.
Case 2:25-cv-01214-JTM-MBN Document 15 Filed 03/24/26 Page 7 of 8

8
amount of $273,168.67 in principal, accrued interest, and penalties with
additional interest accruing daily in the amount of $60.76 from November 21,
2025 until paid in full; and $4,488 in attorney’s fees and costs.
New Orleans, Louisiana this 24th day of March, 2026.
____________________________________
JANE TRICHE MILAZZO
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 2:25-cv-01214-JTM-MBN Document 15 Filed 03/24/26 Page 8 of 8