R.I. Gen. Laws
Rhode Island General Laws

R.I. Gen. Laws § 28-50-4 (2026)

Relief and damages

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

(a) A person who alleges a violation of this chapter may bring a civil action for appropriate injunctive relief, or treble damages, or both within three (3) years after the occurrence of the alleged violation of this chapter.

(b) An action commenced pursuant to subsection (a) may be brought in the superior court for the county where the alleged violation occurred, the county where the complainant resides, or the county where the person against whom the civil complaint is filed resides or has their principal place of business.

(c) As used in subsection (a) of this section, “damages” means damages for injury or loss caused by each violation of this chapter.

(d) [Deleted by P.L. 2012, ch. 306, § 5 and P.L. 2012, ch. 344, § 5.]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2002–2024 · leading case: Horn v. S. Union Co., 927 A.2d 292 (R.I. 2007).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Horn v. S. Union Co., 927 A.2d 292 (R.I. 2007). · cites it 2× “1956 chapter 5 of title 28) and § 28-5-17 (requiring an aggrieved employee to file charge with commission within one year) with § 28-50-3 (protecting employee who participates in an investigation or hearing held by a public body) and § 28-50-4 (requiring a person alleging…”
Adams v. Uno Restaurants, Inc., 794 A.2d 489 (R.I. 2002). · cites it 2× “The Rhode Island Whistleblowers’ Protection Act, G.L.1956 § 28-50-4(a) provides that: "A person who alleges a violation of this act may bring a civil action for appropriate injunctive relief, or actual damages, or both within three (3) years after the occurrence of the alleged…”
Melissa E. Goddard v. APG Sec.-RI, LLC, alias John Doe Corp., 134 A.3d 173 (R.I. 2016). “1956 chapter 50 of title 28, provides an explicit three-year statute of limitations, § 28-50-4(a), and the Civil Rights Act of 1990, G.”
Maturi v. McLaughlin Rsch. Corp., 413 F.3d 166 (1st Cir. 2005). “” R.I. Gen. Laws § 28-50-4(d). Appellants’ state law claim must fail, because neither Harold nor Henry was “about to report” Conn’s receipt of dual salaries and benefits to “a public body.”
Peter W. Russo v. State of Rhode Island, Dep't of Mental Health, Retardation & Hospitals, 87 A.3d 399 (R.I. 2014). · cites it 4× “Russo cites specifically to G.L.1956 § 28-50-4(a) and § 28-50-4(c), which deal with the relief available to a plaintiff under the WPA.”
McDaniel v. Preserve Prop. Mgmt. Co., LLC (D.R.I. 2024). “§ 28-50-4(a). Defendants argue that the statute is inapplicable here because it does not apply to discriminatory actions taken against former employees.”
— R.I. Gen. Laws § 28-50-4(a) — 4 cases
Adams v. Uno Restaurants, Inc., 794 A.2d 489 (R.I. 2002). “The Rhode Island Whistleblowers’ Protection Act, G.L.1956 § 28-50-4(a) provides that: "A person who alleges a violation of this act may bring a civil action for appropriate injunctive relief, or actual damages, or both within three (3) years after the occurrence of the alleged…”
Melissa E. Goddard v. APG Sec.-RI, LLC, alias John Doe Corp., 134 A.3d 173 (R.I. 2016). “1956 chapter 50 of title 28, provides an explicit three-year statute of limitations, § 28-50-4(a), and the Civil Rights Act of 1990, G.”
Peter W. Russo v. State of Rhode Island, Dep't of Mental Health, Retardation & Hospitals, 87 A.3d 399 (R.I. 2014). “Russo cites specifically to G.L.1956 § 28-50-4(a) and § 28-50-4(c), which deal with the relief available to a plaintiff under the WPA.”
McDaniel v. Preserve Prop. Mgmt. Co., LLC (D.R.I. 2024). “§ 28-50-4(a). Defendants argue that the statute is inapplicable here because it does not apply to discriminatory actions taken against former employees.”
— R.I. Gen. Laws § 28-50-4(c) — 1 case
Peter W. Russo v. State of Rhode Island, Dep't of Mental Health, Retardation & Hospitals, 87 A.3d 399 (R.I. 2014). “Russo cites specifically to G.L.1956 § 28-50-4(a) and § 28-50-4(c), which deal with the relief available to a plaintiff under the WPA.”
— R.I. Gen. Laws § 28-50-4(d) — 1 case
Maturi v. McLaughlin Rsch. Corp., 413 F.3d 166 (1st Cir. 2005). “” R.I. Gen. Laws § 28-50-4(d). Appellants’ state law claim must fail, because neither Harold nor Henry was “about to report” Conn’s receipt of dual salaries and benefits to “a public body.”
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.