Opinion
11-P-318
03-30-2012
CITIBANK (SOUTH DAKOTA), N.A. v. CHARLES GARABEDIAN.
NOTICE: Decisions issued by the Appeals Court pursuant to its rule 1:28 are primarily addressed to the parties and, therefore, may not fully address the facts of the case or the panel's decisional rationale. Moreover, rule 1:28 decisions are not circulated to the entire court and, therefore, represent only the views of the panel that decided the case. A summary decision pursuant to rule 1:28, issued after February 25, 2008, may be cited for its persuasive value but, because of the limitations noted above, not as binding precedent.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PURSUANT TO RULE 1:28
This is an appeal from an Appellate Division of the District Court affirmance of a summary judgment in favor of Citibank on its claim for payment by the defendant for his credit card account. We affirm.
The defendant asserts that a previous Citibank action to recover a debt on a separate credit card account, also delinquent, precludes this action. This argument is entirely without merit. Each delinquent debt provides a separate cause of action, and the claim that a judgment on one debt is res judicata with respect to a different debt is frivolous.
The earlier dismissal of this action 'without prejudice' for failure to serve the defendant pursuant to Mass.R.Civ.P.4(j), 402 Mass. 1401 (1988), by definition allows the action to be refiled.
We assume that Citibank is entitled to its costs of collection, including attorneys fees, pursuant to the underlying credit contract.
Decision and order of the Appellate Division affirmed.
By the Court (Graham, Grainger & Hanlon, JJ.),