CRAZY CIVIL COURT ← Back
WASHINGTON COUNTY • CS-2026-00153

LVNV Funding LLC v. Kelly Stowe

Filed: Feb 23, 2026
Type: CS

What's This Case About?

Let’s be honest: this case is about a corporation suing a woman for less than four grand over a credit card debt that’s changed hands more times than a dollar bill at a strip club — and somehow, this is considered a proper use of the court system. Yes, in Washington County, Oklahoma, the wheels of justice are turning — not for murder, not for fraud, not even for a dog bite — but for $3,823.03. That’s it. That’s the whole ballgame.

Now, let’s meet our players. On one side, we’ve got LVNV Funding LLC — a name that sounds like a rejected tech startup or a villainous LLC from a Scooby-Doo episode. In reality, it’s a debt buyer, which means it doesn’t lend money. It buys up old, delinquent debts — often for pennies on the dollar — then sues people to collect the full amount. Think of them as the vultures of the financial world: they circle until someone misses a payment, then they swoop in with a lawsuit and a team of lawyers. And speaking of lawyers — yes, six of them are listed on this petition, because apparently collecting $3,823 requires a legal dream team. William L. Nixon, Jr. is the lead counsel, backed up by five others from the firm LOVE, BEAL & NIXON, P.C. — a name so dramatic it sounds like a law firm from a 1980s cop show. Their job? To prove that Kelly Stowe, a regular person living in Washington County, owes money that she hasn’t paid.

And who is Kelly Stowe? Well, we don’t know much — and that’s the point. She’s not a defendant in a criminal case. She hasn’t been accused of theft or fraud. She’s just someone who, at some point in 2022, opened a credit account through WebBank — possibly via an online lender like Avant, known for offering personal loans to folks with less-than-perfect credit. She used the card, made some payments, maybe missed a few, and eventually defaulted. That’s when the dominoes started falling. First, WebBank wrote off the debt. Then, Avant — the company that likely managed the loan — bundled it with hundreds of other delinquent accounts and sold the whole portfolio to LVNV Funding in April 2024. Now, LVNV claims they legally own that debt and want their money. Enter: the lawsuit.

So what actually happened? Well, nothing particularly dramatic — which is what makes this so wild. There’s no dispute over identity theft, no allegation that Kelly Stowe maxed out the card and fled the country. According to the affidavit filed by Dimeshia Hook — an “Authorized Representative” of LVNV — the company has the records, the account number (XXXXXXX6351), the original creditor (WebBank), and the balance owed: $3,823.03. They even claim they sent a demand letter more than 30 days ago — the legal courtesy knock before suing. And now? They’re asking the court to step in and issue a judgment. That means if the judge agrees, Kelly could be ordered to pay the full amount, plus interest, court costs, and — get this — a “reasonable attorney’s fee.” So not only might she owe the debt, but she could also be on the hook for LVNV’s six-lawyer squad’s time. It’s like being fined for speeding and then getting billed for the cop’s coffee that morning.

Now, let’s talk about what LVNV actually wants. $3,823.03. Is that a lot? In the grand scheme of civil lawsuits, it’s pocket change. Most personal injury cases start at five figures. Real estate disputes? Tens of thousands, easy. But in the world of debt collection, this is a typical haul. The real question isn’t the amount — it’s the system. Because LVNV didn’t lend Kelly a dime. They bought her debt, likely for under $1,000, and now they’re suing for nearly four times that. If they win, it’s pure profit. And they do this all the time. A quick search of public records shows LVNV has filed hundreds of similar lawsuits across Oklahoma and other states — tiny claims, stacked up like poker chips, adding up to millions in potential judgments. This isn’t about one person’s debt. This is about a business model built on volume, automation, and the fact that most people don’t show up to court. Default judgments — where the plaintiff wins simply because the defendant didn’t respond — are the golden goose for debt buyers. And let’s be real: how many people are going to take off work, drive to the courthouse, and fight a company with six lawyers over $3,800?

Which brings us to the most absurd part of this whole saga: the sheer imbalance. On one side, you have a faceless corporation with a legal team that reads like a law firm’s holiday party guest list. On the other, a single individual — Kelly Stowe — who may not even know she’s being sued until a judgment shows up on her credit report. The filing doesn’t say she’s been served. It doesn’t say she’s responded. It doesn’t even say she’s aware of this. And that’s the quiet horror of modern debt collection: it’s not personal. It’s industrial. It’s algorithmic. It’s a machine that grinds out lawsuits like a printer spitting out tax forms.

Are we rooting for Kelly Stowe? Honestly — yes. Not because she definitely didn’t owe the money. Not because debt should go unpaid. But because the idea that a multi-million-dollar debt buyer needs the full power of the state to chase down a sub-$4,000 balance feels like using a flamethrower to light a candle. If she made a mistake, she should pay — but not to a company that bought the debt for scraps and now wants a full payout with legal garnish. And if she doesn’t owe it? If there’s a mix-up, a typo, or a missing payment record? Then this whole thing becomes a Kafkaesque nightmare — a woman being sued by a corporation that can’t even prove how it owns her debt, backed by six lawyers who’ve never met her.

Look, debt is real. People borrow money and should pay it back. But when the system turns into a collection assembly line — when six attorneys file a lawsuit over less than four grand — something’s broken. And the saddest part? This case won’t be the last. Tomorrow, LVNV will file another. And another. And another. All across Oklahoma, all across the country, debt buyers are turning courthouses into collection agencies. And Kelly Stowe? She’s just one name on a spreadsheet. One number in a portfolio. One more stop on the debt train. All for $3,823.03. Choo-choo.

Case Overview

$3,823 Demand Petition
Jurisdiction
District Court, Oklahoma
Relief Sought
$3,823 Monetary
Plaintiffs
Defendants
Claims
# Cause of Action Description
1 Debt Collection Plaintiff seeks $3,823.03 in debt

Petition Text

546 words
25-50056-0 ZH1 010 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF OKLAHOMA LVNV Funding LLC, ) ) ) ) ) ) No. CS-2024-153 vs. Kelly Stowe, ) ) ) ) ) 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. WebBank, provided credit to the defendant on account number XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX6351. The Defendant defaulted on the obligation. The account has been assigned to Plaintiff. 2. Defendant owes Plaintiff $3,823.03. 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 $3,823.03, 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 WASHINGTON COUNTY, OK LVNV Funding LLC Plaintiff vs. Kelly Stowe 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 XXXXXXXXXXXXX6351 (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 Kelly Stowe by WebBank on or about 08/04/2022. Said business records further indicate that the Account was then owned by Avant, LLC. Avant, LLC later sold and/or assigned Portfolio 43518, which included the Defendant's Account, to Plaintiff or Plaintiff's predecessor(s)-in-interest on 04/26/2024. Thereafter, all ownership rights were assigned to, transferred to and became vested in Plaintiff, including the right to collect the balance owing of $3,823.03 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. [signature] Dimeshia Hook November 19, 2025 The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me by the above-signed on Wednesday, November 19, 2025. ______________________________ (Notary Public) PLAINTIFF'S AFFIDAVIT OF INDEBTEDNESS AND OWNERSHIP OF ACCOUNT
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.