9 Rhode Island opinions name it 2 courts 1980–2026 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 |
|---|---|---|
Heflin v. Koszelagreen2 sentences2026Accordingly, we “review de novo the propriety of the hearing justice’s statute of limitations determination.” Heflin v. Koszela, 774 A.2d 25, 31 (R.I. 2001); see Balletta v. McHale, 823 A.2d 292, 294 (R.I. 2003). 2003“Consequently, we will review de novo the propriety of the hearing justice’s statute of limitations determination.” Heflin v. Koszela, 774 A.2d 25, 31 (R.I.2001). | 2 | 2 |
Balletta v. McHalegreen1 sentence2026Accordingly, we “review de novo the propriety of the hearing justice’s statute of limitations determination.” Heflin v. Koszela, 774 A.2d 25, 31 (R.I. 2001); see Balletta v. McHale, 823 A.2d 292, 294 (R.I. 2003). | 1 | 1 |
Kevorkian v. Glassgreen1 sentence2003“Rule 50 * * * may be asserted only during or after a trial.” Kevorkian v. Glass, 774 A.2d 22, 24 (R.I.2001). | 1 | 1 |
Kimball v. Kellygreen2 sentences2001“A contingent claim, within the meaning of the [probate] statute, is one that depends for its effect upon some future event which may or may not happen.” Kimball v. Kelly, 65 R.I. 484, 487 , 16 A.2d 491, 492 (1940) (quoting Hicks v. Wilbur, 38 R.I. 268, 272 , 94 A. 872, 874 (1915)). 2001“A contingent claim, within the meaning of the [probate] statute, is one that depends for its effect upon some future event which may or may not happen.” Kimball v. Kelly, 65 R.I. 484, 487 , 16 A.2d 491, 492 (1940) (quoting Hicks v. Wilbur, 38 R.I. 268, 272 , 94 A. 872, 874 (1915)). | 1 | 1 |
Hicks v. Wilburgreen2 sentences2001“A contingent claim, within the meaning of the [probate] statute, is one that depends for its effect upon some future event which may or may not happen.” Kimball v. Kelly, 65 R.I. 484, 487 , 16 A.2d 491, 492 (1940) (quoting Hicks v. Wilbur, 38 R.I. 268, 272 , 94 A. 872, 874 (1915)). 2001“A contingent claim, within the meaning of the [probate] statute, is one that depends for its effect upon some future event which may or may not happen.” Kimball v. Kelly, 65 R.I. 484, 487 , 16 A.2d 491, 492 (1940) (quoting Hicks v. Wilbur, 38 R.I. 268, 272 , 94 A. 872, 874 (1915)). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Ahmadjiangreen1 sentence1994It is well established that “[t]he trial justice is free to instruct the jury in his own words in a criminal proceeding, as long as he or she states the applicable law.” State v. Ahmadjian, 438 A.2d 1070, 1086 (R.I.1981). | 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 |
|---|---|---|
Palmisano v. Toth
green
2 sentences2015Palmisano, 624 A.2d at 320 . 1996This Court must "test by an evidentiary hearing the propriety of a claim for punitive damages." Id. , at 320. | 2 | 1996–2015 |
Gierman v. Toman
green
1 sentence2000Id. | 1 | 2000–2000 |
State v. McGehearty
green
1 sentence1980Our current rule on the propriety of hearing constitutional claims for the first time in postconviction proceedings also requires the Superior Court justice to find as a preliminary matter that “the record discloses that the breach complained of will constitute something more than harmless error.” State v. McGehearty, R.I., 394 A.2d at 1352 . | 1 | 1980–1980 |
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.