Court grants judgment to Prestige Financial; pro se defendant told how to seek counsel or payment plan

In a contract/collection hearing, Prestige Financial's attorney, Katie Green, asked the court to strike the defendant's responsive filing and enter judgment on the pleadings under Georgia pleading rules (OCGA citations were discussed in court). Green told the court the complaint attached the contract and account statement evidencing a liquidated balance and urged that the defenses were not properly pled.

The defendant, Latoya Shante Knox, appeared pro se and said she did not intend the filings she submitted to serve as a formal answer; the judge explained clerks cannot provide legal advice and outlined routes the defendant could take, including contacting legal‑aid organizations or negotiating a payment plan with the creditor. Plaintiff counsel stated the complaint's itemized amounts (principal $5,948.17; interest as pleaded $3,583.71; fees $770) and offered to e‑file a proposed order; the court instructed plaintiff counsel to file a proposed order for the judge's signature.

Why it matters: A judgment on the pleadings typically converts the pleadings into a judgment without a trial when a responsive filing fails to present a factual defense. The pro se defendant was informed of post‑judgment collection options and told where to seek legal assistance.

What happens next: Plaintiff counsel will e‑file a proposed order reflecting the court's ruling; the defendant may contact plaintiff counsel to discuss payment arrangements or seek legal aid representatives to consider post‑judgment options.