I was gaslit during the divorce about a large annuity

 I was told that 'husbands' annuity  $650,000 was bought. for him by the company therefore it was 'his'. I found an letter written by my attorney stating that he, 'husband' bought the annuity, and my attorney knew it was a lie, awarding him an asset, purchased during the automatic orders, with marital funds.

The statute od limitations against my lawyer has expired, but I was denied a motion to open the judgement, and am in the CT Court of appeal--pro se.

Any information about collusion between opposing counsel, automatic orders would be appreciated.

Thank you!

Gaslit

This appears to be a matter of state (CT) law, as is the concept of “automatic orders”, and would be strange to most everybody who participates in this forum. Maybe you will get lucky with a response by someone competent with CT law. The only thing I can offer you, after hesitation and some misgiving, is the principle that the statute of limitations is commonly “tolled” (essentially meaning that the running of the statute is suspended) if the breach is concealed (you mentioned collusion) but only until the victim learned, or should have learned, of the breach. However, the application of the statute of limitations is determined at the trial level, and if not brought up at trial, it might an issue that the appeals court will not consider. Furthermore, this is a highly technical, legal argument, the details of which are beyond an untrained person. The explanation of the principle is not legal advice. At best, it is a suggestion of something you might get legal advice about. Unfortunately, the system is difficult (if not impossible), complex, and expensive, especially when you are going back in time to undo or re-examine something that was decided in the past. But you know that already.

If anyone might help, consider Connecticut attorney Linda Ursin.

Among other reasons, her website mentions some opportunity to change a property settlement if a party can show fraud.

https://www.ursinlaw.com/modification-of-property-settlement/

This is not advice to anyone.