CRAZY CIVIL COURT ← Back
GARVIN COUNTY • CJ-2026-00038

HONEY BADGER FINANCIAL, LLC v. JANNIE LYNN MANN and KALYN KATHRYN DENISE TYSON

Filed: Mar 4, 2026
Type: CJ

What's This Case About?

Let’s get one thing straight: someone thought it was a good idea to name their company Honey Badger Financial, LLC—as in, the animal that don’t care, the creature that fights lions for fun, the undisputed heavyweight champion of not giving a damn—and now that same company is suing two women in Oklahoma over a Jeep Grand Cherokee they couldn’t afford. And not just any Jeep, mind you—a 2015 model, which, in car years, is basically a senior citizen with a midlife crisis. But here we are. Because when the honey badger does care? It sues. For $17,129.66. And that, my friends, is how you know we’re deep in the glorious, petty trenches of civil court drama.

So who are these people? On one side, we’ve got Honey Badger Financial, LLC, which sounds less like a lending institution and more like a boutique MMA promotion or a craft beer brand from Arizona. But no—this is a financial entity, likely one of those companies that buys up auto loans from dealerships when the original buyer starts falling behind. They swoop in, take over the debt, and then come at you like a pissed-off mustelid with a law degree. Represented by the full cavalry of Robinson, Hoover & Fudge, PLLC (yes, really—Fudge is the lead attorney, and we are 100% rooting for his childhood nickname to have been “Hugh J. Blouse”), they mean business. Or at least, they mean collection.

On the other side of this vehicular showdown: Jannie Lynn Mann and Kalyn Kathryn Denise Tyson. We don’t know if they’re roommates, sisters, ex-best friends who had a falling out over a shared Spotify playlist, or just two people who thought co-signing a car loan was a solid life decision. But what we do know is that on March 13, 2023, they walked into Seth Wadley Auto Connection—which, by the way, sounds like a roadside repair shop run by a guy who wears overalls and has a dog named Buddy—and said, “We’ll take that 2015 Jeep Grand Cherokee, please.” Maybe it was the rugged SUV aesthetic. Maybe they needed something to haul mulch. Or maybe they just really, really wanted to feel like they were on an off-road adventure in the middle of Chickasha. Whatever the reason, they signed on the dotted line.

Fast forward a bit, and things go south. Not Breaking Bad south, but more like “forgot to pay the car note for several months” south. The filing doesn’t say why they defaulted—maybe money got tight, maybe one of them lost a job, maybe they discovered the Jeep had a mysterious oil leak that turned their garage into a scene from The Texas Chain Saw Massacre. But whatever the reason, the payments stopped. And when payments stop, the machine kicks in. The Jeep was repossessed—probably under cover of darkness, possibly with a tow truck driver named Earl who listens to Lynyrd Skynyrd on repeat. Then, in true used-car-lot fashion, the vehicle was sold. Not for top dollar, obviously—this isn’t Car and Driver’s Car of the Year. But enough to cover some of what was owed.

Here’s where math becomes our villain. After the sale proceeds were applied to the debt, there was still a balance left. A deficiency, in legal-speak. That’s the leftover debt after the car gets sold and the money doesn’t cover what’s owed. And in this case, that deficiency is $17,129.66. Ouch. Now, Honey Badger Financial—having legally acquired the right to collect this debt (because someone, somewhere, assigned it to them like a high school math problem no one wanted to solve)—is coming after Jannie and Kalyn for every penny. Plus interest. Plus fees. Plus, theoretically, the emotional toll of being sued by an entity named after an animal that eats scorpions for breakfast.

Now, let’s talk about why they’re in court. The legal claim here is breach of contract—a phrase that sounds dramatic but really just means “you signed a deal, and you didn’t hold up your end.” In this case, the deal was: “You get a Jeep. You pay money every month. If you don’t pay, we take the Jeep and you still owe what’s left.” That’s standard auto financing 101. But here’s the twist: Honey Badger isn’t the original lender. They’re the assignee, meaning the original seller (Seth Wadley Auto Connection) probably sold the contract to them, maybe because they didn’t want to deal with collections, or maybe because they needed quick cash to buy more questionable inventory (like that 2008 Hummer H3 with 300,000 miles and a “vintage” smell).

So Honey Badger steps in, inherits the contract, and now they’re the ones holding the bag. And the bag has a $17,129.66 hole in it. They’re asking the court to make Jannie and Kalyn pay up—not just the principal, but also interest at 16.99% per year (which is wildly high, like “payday loan meets credit card from hell” high), plus attorney’s fees and court costs. That brings the total demand to $17,932.66. Let that sink in: they want nearly $18,000 over a nine-year-old SUV that probably had a “Check Engine” light on before it even left the lot.

Is $17,932.66 a lot in this situation? Well, let’s do the math. The average annual income in Garvin County, Oklahoma, is around $45,000. So we’re talking about 40% of a year’s salary. For a used car. That’s not just a dent in your budget—that’s a full-on financial crater. On the flip side, from Honey Badger’s perspective, this is business. They bought this debt expecting a return. If they don’t collect, they lose. But still—16.99% interest? That’s the kind of rate that makes credit card companies blush. It’s the financial equivalent of adding insult to injury: “Oh, you couldn’t afford the Jeep? Cool. Now you owe us even more, and it’s growing every day like a money fungus.”

And what do they want? Judgment. Cold, hard, court-ordered judgment. They want the judge to say, “Yes, Jannie and Kalyn, you owe this money.” Then they’ll likely garnish wages, seize bank accounts, or just make life generally unpleasant until the debt is paid. No mention of jail time—this isn’t a criminal case, and you can’t go to prison for being broke in America (yet). But the threat of financial consequences? That’s very real.

Now, here’s our take: the most absurd part of this whole saga isn’t the high interest rate, or the honey badger branding, or even the fact that two people are being sued over a nearly decade-old SUV. It’s that we live in a world where a financial entity can buy someone’s car debt, rebrand itself after an animal known for its fearlessness and aggression, and then legally pursue individuals who just… couldn’t keep up with payments. And sure, contracts are contracts. If you sign something, you should expect to honor it. But let’s not pretend this is a fair fight. One side has a team of five lawyers with matching letterhead. The other side? We don’t even know if they have representation. The filing doesn’t say.

We’re not saying Jannie and Kalyn are innocent angels who were tricked into buying a cursed Jeep by a car salesman with a hidden agenda. But we’re also not blind to how these systems work: predatory interest rates, aggressive repossession tactics, and debt buyers who profit off people’s misfortune. And while we do believe in personal responsibility, we also believe in calling out the absurdity of a company called Honey Badger Financial acting like it’s doing the Lord’s work by chasing down $17,000 in auto debt.

So who are we rooting for? Honestly? We’re rooting for the Jeep. That 2015 Grand Cherokee has been through more drama than a reality TV cast. It’s been bought, defaulted on, repossessed, sold, and then used as the basis for a lawsuit. If that Jeep had a diary, it would be a bestseller. “I was just trying to get people from Point A to Point B… and now I’ve destroyed a friendship and triggered a legal battle.” At this point, it deserves a museum exhibit.

But if we have to pick a side? We’re hoping for a settlement. Something fair. Something that doesn’t bankrupt two people over a car that probably wasn’t worth half the amount they owe. Because at the end of the day, the real honey badger in this story isn’t the company. It’s life itself—ruthless, unpredictable, and always ready to remind you that sometimes, the biggest dangers aren’t lions or scorpions… they’re auto financing agreements with 16.99% interest.

Case Overview

$17,933 Demand Petition
Jurisdiction
DISTRICT COURT, OKLAHOMA
Relief Sought
$17,933 Monetary
Plaintiffs
Claims
# Cause of Action Description
1 breach of contract default on vehicle purchase contract

Petition Text

225 words
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF GARVIN COUNTY STATE OF OKLAHOMA HONEY BADGER FINANCIAL, LLC Plaintiff, vs. JANNIE LYNN MANN and KALYN KATHRYN DENISE TYSON Defendants. PETITION COMES NOW the plaintiff, by and through its undersigned attorneys, and states as follows: 1. SETH WADLEY AUTO CONNECTION and the defendants executed a contract on March 13, 2023 whereby the defendants purchased a 2015 JEEP GRAND CHEROKEE ("motor vehicle"). 2. The defendants have defaulted in the obligations required under the contract. 3. The motor vehicle was recovered and sold. After the proceeds of the sale were applied to the indebtedness owed by the defendants, there remains a deficiency balance owed under the contract. 4. The defendants are indebted to plaintiff, as assignee, in the principal amount of $17,129.66, with interest at the contractual rate of 16.99% per annum from March 21, 2025 through February 23, 2026 in the amount of $2,703.00. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against the defendants as follows: 1. The principal amount of $17,129.66; 2. Prejudgment and post judgment interest at the contractual rate (12 O.S. § 727.1); 3. All costs of this action (12 O.S. § 928); 4. A reasonable attorney fee (12 O.S. § 936); and 5. Such other relief to which plaintiff may be justly entitled. Hugh D. Fudge (OBA# 20487) Dani L. Schinzing (OBA# 32113) Emily R. Remmer (OBA# 22110) Sean A. Nelson (OBA# 30194) Keith A. Daniels (OBA# 19788) Robinson, Hoover & Fudge, PLLC P.O. Box 1748, Oklahoma City, OK 73101 (405) 232-6464 | (833) 342-0001 Toll Free [email protected] | (405) 232-6363 Fax Attorneys for Plaintiff
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.