11 Rhode Island opinions name it 2 courts 1977–2020 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Rhode Island courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Santosky v. Kramergreen2 sentences2009With respect to allocation of evidentiary burdens, the United States Supreme Court has noted as follows: “[I]n any given proceeding, the minimum standard of proof tolerated by the due process requirement reflects not only the weight of the private and public interests affected, but also a societal judgment about how the risk of error should be distributed between the litigants.” Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745, 755 , 102 S.Ct. 1388 , 71 L.Ed.2d 599 (1982). 2009With respect to allocation of evidentiary burdens, the United States Supreme Court has noted as follows: “[I]n any given proceeding, the minimum standard of proof tolerated by the due process requirement reflects not only the weight of the private and public interests affected, but also a societal judgment about how the risk of error should be distributed between the litigants.” Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745, 755 , 102 S.Ct. 1388 , 71 L.Ed.2d 599 (1982). | 2 | 3 |
Gott v. Norberggreen1 sentence2013Pawtucket Transfer Operations, LLC, 944 A.2d at 859 . “[A] zoning board’s determinations of law * * * ‘are not binding on the reviewing court; they may be reviewed to determine what the law is and its applicability to the facts.’ ” Id. (quoting Gott v. Norberg, 417 A.2d 1352, 1361 (R.I.1980)). | 1 | 1 |
Baccari v. Donatgreen1 sentence2000Operation Clean Government v. Judicial Tenure, 741 A.2d at 262. | 1 | 1 |
RET. BD. OF EMPLOYEES RET. SYS. v. Ciancigreen1 sentence1999Retirement Board of the Employees Retirement System of Providence v. Cianci, 722 A.2d 1196, 1198 (R.I.1999). | 1 | 1 |
World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodsongreen2 sentences1992This minimum standard “protects the defendant against the burdens of litigating in a distant or inconvenient forum” and mandates that “the States * * * do not reach out beyond their limits * * * as coequal sovereigns in a federal system.” World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson, 444 U.S. 286, 292 , 100 S.Ct. 559, 564 , 62 L.Ed.2d 490, 498 (1980). 1992This minimum standard “protects the defendant against the burdens of litigating in a distant or inconvenient forum” and mandates that “the States * * * do not reach out beyond their limits * * * as coequal sovereigns in a federal system.” World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson, 444 U.S. 286, 292 , 100 S.Ct. 559, 564 , 62 L.Ed.2d 490, 498 (1980). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Spraguegreen2 sentences1977As we have previously noted, “where one construction of an act of the Legislature operates to defeat an otherwise legitimate legislative intendment while another serves to support it, we will adopt the latter construction.” State v. Sprague, 113 R.I. 351, 355 , 322 A.2d 36, 38 (1974). 1977As we have previously noted, “where one construction of an act of the Legislature operates to defeat an otherwise legitimate legislative intendment while another serves to support it, we will adopt the latter construction.” State v. Sprague, 113 R.I. 351, 355 , 322 A.2d 36, 38 (1974). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Rhode Island. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Pawtucket Transfer Operations, LLC v. City of Pawtucket
green
2 sentences2013Pawtucket Transfer Operations, LLC, 944 A.2d at 859 . “[A] zoning board’s determinations of law * * * ‘are not binding on the reviewing court; they may be reviewed to determine what the law is and its applicability to the facts.’ ” Id. (quoting Gott v. Norberg, 417 A.2d 1352, 1361 (R.I.1980)). 2013Pawtucket Transfer Operations, LLC, 944 A.2d at 859 . “[A] zoning board’s determinations of law * * * ‘are not binding on the reviewing court; they may be reviewed to determine what the law is and its applicability to the facts.’ ” Id. (quoting Gott v. Norberg, 417 A.2d 1352, 1361 (R.I.1980)). | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Woodby v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
green
2 sentences2009It is also well established that the degree of proof required in a particular type of proceeding “is the kind of question which has traditionally been left to the judiciary to resolve.” Woodby v. INS, 385 U.S. 276, 284 , 87 S.Ct. 483 , 17 L.Ed.2d 362 (1966). 2009It is also well established that the degree of proof required in a particular type of proceeding “is the kind of question which has traditionally been left to the judiciary to resolve.” Woodby v. INS, 385 U.S. 276, 284 , 87 S.Ct. 483 , 17 L.Ed.2d 362 (1966). | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Kelley v. Midwestern Indemnity Co.
green
1 sentence2006Instead, the insured would simply be liable for any amount below the minimum requirement that was not covered by a separate insurance, i.e. the "gap." This interpretation is enunciated in the Ohio Court of Appeals' holding in Kelley v. Ernst, 670 N.E.2d 510 (Ohio Ct.App. 1995). | 1 | 2006–2006 |
State v. Ziobrowski
green
1 sentence1992In Benoit we departed from the minimum standard of the Fourth Amendment and increased the level of protection under article I, section 6, of our State Constitution because of the great instability surrounding the exigency requirement of the automobile exception. 417 A.2d at 900 n.1. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
McCaskey v. Kirchoff
green
2 sentences1977The court said, in part: “If the salutary purpose of the Election Act to purify the politics of this State by preventing fraud and wrongdoing in the nominating procedure, Sadlock v. Allan, above, is not to be completely defeated, the assignment judge should forthwith have declared the petition invalid, instead of eliminating some of the signatures and holding that the remainder were enough to meet the minimum requirement of N.J.S.A. 19:13-5.” Id. at 183 , 152 A.2d at 142 . 1977The court said, in part: “If the salutary purpose of the Election Act to purify the politics of this State by preventing fraud and wrongdoing in the nominating procedure, Sadlock v. Allan, above, is not to be completely defeated, the assignment judge should forthwith have declared the petition invalid, instead of eliminating some of the signatures and holding that the remainder were enough to meet the minimum requirement of N.J.S.A. 19:13-5.” Id. at 183 , 152 A.2d at 142 . | 1 | 1977–1977 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.