Connecticut Court of Appeals, 2012

Citibank (South Dakota) N.A. v. Farina

Citibank (South Dakota) N.A. v. Farina
Connecticut Court of Appeals · Decided January 31, 2012 · Gruendel, Lavine, Espinosa
35 A.3d 375; 133 Conn. App. 357; 2002 WL 34707632; 2012 Conn. App. LEXIS 52 (Atlantic Reporter, Third Series)

Citibank (South Dakota) N.A. v. Farina

Opinion

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this action to collect on an unpaid credit card debt of approximately $15,000, the self-represented defendant, Richard M. Farina, appeals from the trial court’s denial of his motion to open and to vacate the judgment. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

On May 12, 2009, the plaintiff, Citibank (South Dakota) N.A., filed its complaint. On October 21, 2009, the court granted the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment. The defendant timely filed an appeal in this court, which affirmed the judgment of the trial court. Citibank (South Dakota) N.A. v. Farina, 122 Conn. App. 901, 995 A.2d 649, cert. denied, 299 Conn. 901, 10 A.3d 519 (2010).

*359 Less than two months after this court’s decision was issued, the defendant filed a motion to open and to vacate the judgment. On September 2, 2010, the trial court denied the defendant’s motion and sustained the plaintiffs objection to it. In its articulation of its ruling, the trial court made a finding that the issues raised by the defendant in his motion were frivolous.

Although the issues framed in the defendant’s statement of issues are, on their face, cogent, his analysis of them is not. Like the trial court, we conclude that the issues raised by the defendant are frivolous. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The judgment is affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.