R.I. Gen. Laws
Rhode Island General Laws

R.I. Gen. Laws § 10-3-12 (2026)

Grounds for vacating award

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section RI-LEGwebserver.rilegislature.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

In any of the following cases, the court must make an order vacating the award upon the application of any party to the arbitration:

(1) Where the award was procured by corruption, fraud or undue means.

(2) Where there was evident partiality or corruption on the part of the arbitrators, or either of them.

(3) Where the arbitrators were guilty of misconduct in refusing to postpone the hearing, upon sufficient cause shown, or in hearing legally immaterial evidence, or refusing to hear evidence pertinent and material to the controversy, or of any other misbehavior by which the rights of any party have been substantially prejudiced.

(4) Where the arbitrators exceeded their powers, or so imperfectly executed them that a mutual, final, and definite award upon the subject matter submitted was not made.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 53 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1977–2026 · leading case: Pier House Inn, Inc. v. 421 Corp., Inc., 812 A.2d 799 (R.I. 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Pier House Inn, Inc. v. 421 Corp., Inc., 812 A.2d 799 (R.I. 2002). · cites it 10× “By statute, General Laws 1956 § 10-3-12 directs that "the court must make an order vacating the award upon the application of any party to the arbitration: "(1) Where the award was procured by corruption, fraud or undue means.”
Bradford Dyeing Assoc. v. J. Stog Tech GmbH, 765 A.2d 1226 (R.I. 2001). · cites it 11× “On August 25, 1998, Bradford filed a civil action complaint in the Superior Court seeking to vacate or modify the arbitrator’s award pursuant to G.L.1956 §§ 10-3-12 and 10-3-14, respectively, and thereafter on September 2, 1998, Stog filed its motion to confirm the award…”
Berkshire Wilton Partners, LLC v. Bilray Demolition Co., Inc., 91 A.3d 830 (R.I. 2014). · cites it 8× “Berkshire filed a complaint 7 in Providence County Superior Court seeking to vacate the arbitrator’s award pursuant to G.L.1956 § 10-3-12. After Bilray objected to the motion to vacate, a hearing on Berkshire’s motion was held before a Superior Court trial justice on September…”
Joyce Wheeler v. Encompass Ins. Co., 66 A.3d 477 (R.I. 2013). · cites it 10× “General Laws 1956 § 10-3-12 sets forth the narrow conditions that mandate that an arbitration award be vacated: 5 In his bench decision, the trial justice erroneously, we conclude, rejected this Court‘s holding in Allstate Insurance Co.”
Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Grabbert, 590 A.2d 88 (R.I. 1991). · cites it 6× “1988), or if it falls within one of the four statutorily prescribed grounds in § 10-3-12. At the same time we have also remained cognizant of the need for public confidence and integrity in the arbitration process.”
Purvis Sys., Inc. v. Am. Sys. Corp., 788 A.2d 1112 (R.I. 2002). · cites it 3× “The Superior Court judgment provided in pertinent part: “[The modified and supplemental awards] are hereby vacated because (a) the Arbitrator manifestly disregarded applicable law and the terms of the Subcontract in awarding attorney’s fees to [ASC] and (b) so imperfectly stated…”
Joseph Lemerise v. The Com. Ins. Co., 137 A.3d 696 (R.I. 2016). · cites it 4× “4 We recognize that there may be occasions when a trial justice is required to consider testimony and evidence beyond the four corners of the award, such as when a party moves to vacate an award, under G.L. 1956 § 10-3-12, for one of the following reasons: “(1) Where the award…”
McGinity v. Pawtucket Mut. Ins., 899 A.2d 504 (R.I. 2006). · cites it 8× “Section 10-3-12. In relevant part, the statute requires that a court vacate an award “[wjhere there was evident partiality or corruption on the part of the arbitrators, or either of them.”
ABC Bldg. Corp. d/b/a Advanced Bldg. Concepts v. Ropolo Fam., LLC, 179 A.3d 701 (R.I. 2018). · cites it 19× “In light of the Superior Court’s limited review of arbitration awards pursuant to G.L. 1956 § 10-3-12, and given that the arbitrator had already examined and rejected the arguments raised by Ropolo, ABC maintained that the award should be confirmed.”
Buttie v. Norfolk & Dedham Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 995 A.2d 546 (R.I. 2010). · cites it 4× “But, in my view, his decision should not be vacated because there simply is no justification to do so under G.L. 1956 § 10-3-12; the award is not irrational nor is it occasioned by a manifest disregard of the law on behalf of the arbitrator.”
Romano v. Allstate Ins. Co., 458 A.2d 339 (R.I. 1983). · cites it 4× “1956 (1969 Reenactment) § 10-3-12 or that it was completely irrational.”
Allstate Ins. v. Lombardi, 773 A.2d 864 (R.I. 2001). · cites it 2× “— At any time within one year after the award is made, any party to the arbitration may apply to the court for an order confirming the award, and thereupon the court must grant the order confirming the award unless the award is vacated, modified or corrected, as prescribed in §§…”
Show all 53 citing cases →
— R.I. Gen. Laws § 10-3-12(1) — 2 cases
Caffey v. Lees, 175 A.3d 478 (R.I. 2018).
Warnsey Wiggins v. Edward Pianka (R.I. 2021).
— R.I. Gen. Laws § 10-3-12(2) — 5 cases
Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Grabbert, 590 A.2d 88 (R.I. 1991). “1988), or if it falls within one of the four statutorily prescribed grounds in § 10-3-12. At the same time we have also remained cognizant of the need for public confidence and integrity in the arbitration process.”
McGinity v. Pawtucket Mut. Ins., 899 A.2d 504 (R.I. 2006). “Section 10-3-12. In relevant part, the statute requires that a court vacate an award “[wjhere there was evident partiality or corruption on the part of the arbitrators, or either of them.”
V.S. Haseotes & Sons, L.P. Ex Rel. Bentas v. Haseotes, 819 A.2d 1281 (R.I. 2003).
B.R.S. Real Est., Inc. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London, 110 F.4th 442 (1st Cir. 2024).
Vermont Mut. Ins. Co. v. New England Prop. Servs. Grp., LLC (R.I. 2025).
— R.I. Gen. Laws § 10-3-12(3) — 2 cases
M & L Power Servs., Inc. v. Am. Networks Int'l, 44 F. Supp. 2d 134 (D.R.I. 1999).
B.R.S. Real Est., Inc. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London, 110 F.4th 442 (1st Cir. 2024).
— R.I. Gen. Laws § 10-3-12(4) — 6 cases
ABC Bldg. Corp. d/b/a Advanced Bldg. Concepts v. Ropolo Fam., LLC, 179 A.3d 701 (R.I. 2018). “In light of the Superior Court’s limited review of arbitration awards pursuant to G.L. 1956 § 10-3-12, and given that the arbitrator had already examined and rejected the arguments raised by Ropolo, ABC maintained that the award should be confirmed.”
Nappa Constr. Mgmt., LLC v. Caroline Flynn Caroline Flynn v. Nappa Constr. Mgmt., LLC, 152 A.3d 1128 (R.I. 2017).
Berkshire Wilton Partners, LLC v. Bilray Demolition Co., Inc., 91 A.3d 830 (R.I. 2014). “Berkshire filed a complaint 7 in Providence County Superior Court seeking to vacate the arbitrator’s award pursuant to G.L.1956 § 10-3-12. After Bilray objected to the motion to vacate, a hearing on Berkshire’s motion was held before a Superior Court trial justice on September…”
David DiSano v. Argonaut Ins. Co., 178 A.3d 982 (R.I. 2018).
Peerless Ins. v. Nault, 701 A.2d 320 (R.I. 1997).
— R.I. Gen. Laws § 10-3-12(c) — 1 case
Threshier v. Com. Union Ins. Co., 423 A.2d 1389 (R.I. 1980).
— R.I. Gen. Laws § 10-3-12(d) — 3 cases
Bush v. Nationwide Mut. Ins., 448 A.2d 782 (R.I. 1982).
Dutson v. Nationwide Mut. Ins., 383 A.2d 597 (R.I. 1978).
Cole v. Charron, 477 A.2d 959 (R.I. 1984).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.