Legal Opinion
Dime Savings Bank v. Arpaia
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided October 5, 1999No. AC 18764PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
SPEAR, J.
The trial court opened a judgment of foreclosure by sale and, after denying the named defendant’s request to file an answer, rendered judgment setting a new date for the sale. Thereafter, the named defendant, Nicholas E. Arpaia III, filed an appeal. He claims that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the original plaintiff, Dime Savings Bank of Wallingford (Dime), obtained an earlier judgment of foreclosure in this case after it had assigned the note and mortgage to another party.1 We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
*182It is not necessary to detail…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Tomlinson v. Board of EducationSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
- Andover LP I v. Board of Tax ReviewSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
- Steeneck v. University of BridgeportSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
- Federal Deposit Insurance v. Retirement Management Group, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1993
- Carl J. Herzog Foundation, Inc. v. University of BridgeportSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- America's Wholesale Lender v. PaganoConnecticut Appellate Court · 2005
- Ardito v. OlingerConnecticut Appellate Court · 2001
- U.S. Bank National Assn. v. ChristophersenConnecticut Appellate Court · 2018
- Cardi Materials Corp. v. Connecticut Landscaping Bruzzi Corp.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2003
- America's Wholesale Lender v. SilbersteinConnecticut Appellate Court · 2005
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.