10 Rhode Island opinions name it 2 courts 1929–2021 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Cashman Equipment Corporation, Inc. v. Cardi Corporation, Inc.green2 sentences2021“In construing statutes or court rules, it is a fundamental principle of our jurisprudence that when the language of a rule is clear and unambiguous, this Court must give the words of the rule their plain and ordinary meanings.” Id. (quoting Cashman Equipment Corporation, Inc. v. Cardi Corporation, Inc., 139 A.3d 379, 382 (R.I. 2016)). 2019"In construing statutes or court rules, it is a fundamental principle of our jurisprudence that 'when the language of a rule is clear and unambiguous, this Court must give the words of the rule their plain and ordinary meanings.' " Cashman Equipment Corporation, Inc. v. Cardi Corporation, Inc. , 139 A.3d 379 , 382 (R.I. 2016) (brackets omitted) (quoting State v. Brown , 88 A.3d 1101 , 1110 (R.I. 2014) ). | 2 | 3 |
McCarthy v. Environmental Transportation Services, Inc.green2 sentences2016In construing statutes or court rules, it is a fundamental principle of our jurisprudence that “[w]hen the language of a rule is clear and unambiguous, this Court must give the words of the rule their plain and ordinary meanings.” Brown, 88 A.3d at 1110 ; see Shine v. Moreau, 119 A.3d 1 , 9 (R.I.2015); see also McCarthy v. Environmental Transportation Services, Inc., 865 A.2d 1056, 1060 (R.I.2005); Capital Properties, Inc. v. City of Providence, 843 A.2d 456, 460-61 (R.I.2004). 2016In construing statutes or court rules, it is a fundamental principle of our jurisprudence that “[w]hen the language of a rule is clear and unambiguous, this Court must give the words of the rule their plain and ordinary meanings.” Brown, 88 A.3d at 1110 ; see Shine v. Moreau, 119 A.3d 1 , 9 (R.I. 2015); see also McCarthy v. Environmental Transportation Services, Inc., 865 A.2d 1056, 1060 (R.I. 2005); Capital Properties, Inc. v. City of Providence, 843 A.2d 456, 460-61 (R.I. 2004). | 2 | 2 |
Capital Properties, Inc. v. City of Providencegreen2 sentences2016In construing statutes or court rules, it is a fundamental principle of our jurisprudence that “[w]hen the language of a rule is clear and unambiguous, this Court must give the words of the rule their plain and ordinary meanings.” Brown, 88 A.3d at 1110 ; see Shine v. Moreau, 119 A.3d 1 , 9 (R.I.2015); see also McCarthy v. Environmental Transportation Services, Inc., 865 A.2d 1056, 1060 (R.I.2005); Capital Properties, Inc. v. City of Providence, 843 A.2d 456, 460-61 (R.I.2004). 2016In construing statutes or court rules, it is a fundamental principle of our jurisprudence that “[w]hen the language of a rule is clear and unambiguous, this Court must give the words of the rule their plain and ordinary meanings.” Brown, 88 A.3d at 1110 ; see Shine v. Moreau, 119 A.3d 1 , 9 (R.I. 2015); see also McCarthy v. Environmental Transportation Services, Inc., 865 A.2d 1056, 1060 (R.I. 2005); Capital Properties, Inc. v. City of Providence, 843 A.2d 456, 460-61 (R.I. 2004). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Linda A. Diamantegreen2 sentences2016If we “find the statute [or rule] to be unambiguous, we simply apply the plain meaning and our interpretive task is done.” Shine, 119 A.3d at 9 (internal quotation marks omitted); see also State v. Diamante, 83 A.3d 546, 550 (R.I.2014). 2016If we “find the statute [or rule] to be unambiguous, we simply apply the plain meaning and our interpretive task is done.” Shine, 119 A.3d at 9 (internal quotation marks omitted); see also State v. Diamante, 83 A.3d 546, 550 (R.I. 2014). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Kayborn Browngreen2 sentences2019"In construing statutes or court rules, it is a fundamental principle of our jurisprudence that 'when the language of a rule is clear and unambiguous, this Court must give the words of the rule their plain and ordinary meanings.' " Cashman Equipment Corporation, Inc. v. Cardi Corporation, Inc. , 139 A.3d 379 , 382 (R.I. 2016) (brackets omitted) (quoting State v. Brown , 88 A.3d 1101 , 1110 (R.I. 2014) ). 2019“In construing statutes or court rules, it is a fundamental principle of our jurisprudence that ‘when the language of a rule is clear and unambiguous, this Court must give the words of the rule their plain and ordinary meanings.’” Cashman Equipment Corporation, Inc. v. Cardi Corporation, Inc., 139 A.3d 379, 382 (R.I. 2016) (brackets omitted) (quoting State v. Brown, 88 A.3d 1101, 1110 (R.I. 2014)). | 1 | 4 |
Golderese v. Suburban Land Co.green1 sentence2014See Golderese v. Suburban Land Co., 590 A.2d 395, 397 (R.I. *1111 1991). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Germanegreen2 sentences2011In re Brown, 903 A.2d 147, 149 (R.I.2006); see also State v. Germane, 971 A.2d 555, 573 (R.I.2009). 2011In re Brown, 903 A.2d 147, 149 (R.I.2006); see also State v. Germane, 971 A.2d 555, 573 (R.I.2009). | 1 | 1 |
In Re Browngreen2 sentences2011In re Brown, 903 A.2d 147, 149 (R.I.2006); see also State v. Germane, 971 A.2d 555, 573 (R.I.2009). 2011In re Brown, 903 A.2d 147, 149 (R.I.2006); see also State v. Germane, 971 A.2d 555, 573 (R.I.2009). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Angellgreen2 sentences1984See Narragansett Food Services, Inc. v. Rhode Island Department of Labor, R.I., 420 A.2d 805, 808 (1980); Citizens for Preservation of Waterman Lake v. Davis, R.I., 420 A.2d 53, 57 (1980); North Providence School Committee v. Rhode Island State Labor Relations Board, 122 R.I. 415, 418 , 408 A.2d 928, 929 (1979); State v. Angell, 122 R.I. 160, 170 , 405 A.2d 10, 15 (1979). 1984See Narragansett Food Services, Inc. v. Rhode Island Department of Labor, R.I., 420 A.2d 805, 808 (1980); Citizens for Preservation of Waterman Lake v. Davis, R.I., 420 A.2d 53, 57 (1980); North Providence School Committee v. Rhode Island State Labor Relations Board, 122 R.I. 415, 418 , 408 A.2d 928, 929 (1979); State v. Angell, 122 R.I. 160, 170 , 405 A.2d 10, 15 (1979). | 1 | 1 |
NORTH PROVIDENCE SHCOOL COMMITTEE v. Rhode Island State Labor Relations Boardgreen2 sentences1984See Narragansett Food Services, Inc. v. Rhode Island Department of Labor, R.I., 420 A.2d 805, 808 (1980); Citizens for Preservation of Waterman Lake v. Davis, R.I., 420 A.2d 53, 57 (1980); North Providence School Committee v. Rhode Island State Labor Relations Board, 122 R.I. 415, 418 , 408 A.2d 928, 929 (1979); State v. Angell, 122 R.I. 160, 170 , 405 A.2d 10, 15 (1979). 1984See Narragansett Food Services, Inc. v. Rhode Island Department of Labor, R.I., 420 A.2d 805, 808 (1980); Citizens for Preservation of Waterman Lake v. Davis, R.I., 420 A.2d 53, 57 (1980); North Providence School Committee v. Rhode Island State Labor Relations Board, 122 R.I. 415, 418 , 408 A.2d 928, 929 (1979); State v. Angell, 122 R.I. 160, 170 , 405 A.2d 10, 15 (1979). | 1 | 1 |
Citizens for Preservation of Waterman Lake v. Davisgreen1 sentence1984See Narragansett Food Services, Inc. v. Rhode Island Department of Labor, R.I., 420 A.2d 805, 808 (1980); Citizens for Preservation of Waterman Lake v. Davis, R.I., 420 A.2d 53, 57 (1980); North Providence School Committee v. Rhode Island State Labor Relations Board, 122 R.I. 415, 418 , 408 A.2d 928, 929 (1979); State v. Angell, 122 R.I. 160, 170 , 405 A.2d 10, 15 (1979). | 1 | 1 |
Narragansett Food Services, Inc. v. Rhode Island Department of Laborgreen1 sentence1984See Narragansett Food Services, Inc. v. Rhode Island Department of Labor, R.I., 420 A.2d 805, 808 (1980); Citizens for Preservation of Waterman Lake v. Davis, R.I., 420 A.2d 53, 57 (1980); North Providence School Committee v. Rhode Island State Labor Relations Board, 122 R.I. 415, 418 , 408 A.2d 928, 929 (1979); State v. Angell, 122 R.I. 160, 170 , 405 A.2d 10, 15 (1979). | 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Goncalves
green
1 sentence2021“In construing statutes or court rules, it is a fundamental principle of our jurisprudence that when the language of a rule is clear and unambiguous, this Court must give the words of the rule their plain and ordinary meanings.” Id. (quoting Cashman Equipment Corporation, Inc. v. Cardi Corporation, Inc., 139 A.3d 379, 382 (R.I. 2016)). | 1 | 2021–2021 |
State v. Pacheco
green
1 sentence2009Whether Rule 26(b)(2) can be construed, however, to either permit or limit additional discovery of insurance coverage beyond production of the actual insurance agreements is an issue of first impression in this State. "[A]s in statutory construction, if a court rule is free of ambiguity and expresses a clear and definite meaning, there is no room for interpretation or extension, and the court must give to the words of the rule their plain and obvious meaning." State v. Pacheco , 481 A.2d 1009 , 1019 (R.I. 1984). | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Southwestern Casualty Ins. Co. v. Heisterman
neutral
1 sentence1929Co. v. Hill., 167 S. W. 1095 (Texas), a policy of insurance on an automobile against loss by fire contained the clause that it is warranted by the insured the automobile insured “shall not be used for carrying passengers for compensation, and that it shall not be rented or leased.” It was held on appeal, after judgment for the plaintiff, that the use of the car by appellee’s son on several occasions for carrying passengers for hire, without the knowledge of the appellee, did not breach the policy; that the words of this clause were intended by the parties to mean that the owner should not make | 1 | 1929–1929 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.