R.I. Gen. Laws
Rhode Island General Laws

R.I. Gen. Laws § 34-10-1 (2026)

Lawful fences defined

✓ text as last checked Sept. 2026 (this copy records no edition or section history)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section RI-LEGwebserver.rilegislature.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The following fences shall be adjudged to be lawful fences:

(1) A hedge with a ditch shall be three feet (3′) high upon the bank of the ditch, well staked, at the distance of two feet and a half (2½′), bound together at the top and sufficiently filled to prevent small stock from creeping through; and the bank of the ditch shall not be less than one foot (1′) above the surface of the ground.

(2) A hedge without a ditch shall be four feet (4′) high, staked, bound and filled, as a hedge with a ditch.

(3) A post-and-rail fence on the bank of a ditch shall be four (4) rails high, each well set in posts, and not less than four feet and a half (4½′) high.

(4) A stone wall fence shall be four feet (4′) high, with a flat stone hanging over the top thereof or a good rail or pole thereon, well staked or secured with crotches or posts.

(5) A stone wall without flat stones, rails or posts on the top, shall be four feet and a half (4½′) high.

(6) A woven wire fence of wire not less than number nine, firmly fastened to posts not more than sixteen feet (16′) apart, constructed of not less than eleven (11) horizontal wires, the top wire not less than fifty-four inches (54″) from the ground, the bottom wire not more than two inches (2″) from the ground and with stays or uprights not more than six inches (6″) apart.

(7) All other kinds of fences not herein particularly described shall be four feet and a half (4½′) high.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2002–2004 · leading case: Dowdell v. Bloomquist, 847 A.2d 827 (R.I. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Dowdell v. Bloomquist, 847 A.2d 827 (R.I. 2004). · cites it 9× “After the trial justice heard four days of testimony and viewed the property, he made a finding that the row of trees were a fence, based on the language of § 34-10-1. [6] He further found that the objective of privacy claimed by defendant was "no more than a subterfuge for his…”
Wilson v. Handley, 97 Cal. App. 4th 1301 (Cal. Ct. App. 2002). “§ 476:1 (1955); R.I. Gen. Laws § 34-10-1 (1956); Wis. Stat.”
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.