R.I. Gen. Laws
Rhode Island General Laws

R.I. Gen. Laws § 34-28-16 (2026)

Entry of appearance and filing of account or claim

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

(a) The liens, under § 34-28-1, 34-28-2, 34-28-3 or 34-28-7, of all persons, except the persons who have mailed and filed notices of intention under § 34-28-4 before the filing of the complaint and who have not been mailed a copy of the advertisement as provided in § 34-28-14 and who have no actual knowledge, on or before the return day of the citation provided for in §§ 34-28-14 and 34-28-15, of the pendency of the complaint, and the title, claim, lease, mortgage, attachment, or other lien or encumbrance of all persons who have any title, claim, lease, mortgage, attachment, or other lien or encumbrance (other than under § 34-28-1, 34-28-2, 34-28-3 or 34-28-7) to or in the property which is the subject matter of the complaint, except the persons who have recorded the lien or encumbrance before the filing of the complaint and who have not been served with or mailed a citation as provided in § 34-28-15 and who have no actual knowledge, on or before the return day, of the pendency of the complaint, shall be subordinated to the claim of the plaintiff, and persons claiming liens pursuant to this chapter, and any other person having any mortgage, attachment, or other lien or encumbrance who have entered an appearance as a party in the cause, unless the person shall, within twenty (20) days after the return day, or within such other time as may be allowed by the superior court pursuant to Rule 60(b) of the Superior Court Rules of Civil Procedure enter an appearance as a party in the cause commenced by the complaint described in §§ 34-28-10 and 34-28-13 and shall file an answer as follows:

(1) In the case of persons claiming a lien under § 34-28-1, 34-28-2, 34-28-3 or 34-28-7, file an account and demand containing the matters provided in § 34-28-13 for a complaint to enforce a lien, except that the account and demand need not contain a list of the names and addresses of the persons who have filed notices of intention under § 34-28-4, nor a list of all persons who have any recorded title, claim, lease, mortgage, attachment, or other lien or encumbrance, or

(2) In the case of persons who have any title, claim, lease, mortgage, attachment, or other lien or encumbrance (other than under § 34-28-1, 34-28-2, 34-28-3 or 34-28-7), file a claim setting forth the particulars thereof and praying for the relief and priority to which the person shall deem himself or herself entitled.

(b) Nothing in this section shall, however, bar any claim for a lien under § 34-28-1, 34-28-2, 34-28-3 or 34-28-7, by any person for work done or materials furnished, provided the person complies with the requirements of this chapter.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1985–2013 · leading case: Rhode Island Constr. Servs., Inc. v. Harris Mill, LLC, 68 A.3d 450 (R.I. 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Rhode Island Constr. Servs., Inc. v. Harris Mill, LLC, 68 A.3d 450 (R.I. 2013). · cites it 10× “The motion justice recognized that § 34-28-16 allows the Superior Court to restore late claims in mechanics’ lien actions if the claimant can show that its failure to file was due to “excusable neglect” as referenced in Rule 60(b) of the Superior Court Rules of Civil Procedure.”
Multi-State Restoration, Inc. v. DWS Props., LLC., 61 A.3d 414 (R.I. 2013). · cites it 2× “Specifically, § 34-28-33 says that “nothing in this chapter shall be construed to limit the right of any person * * * to remedies otherwise available to him or her under law * * Furthermore, “the rights * * * of any person,” whether or not he or she has filed a claim under §…”
Phoenix Constr. Co., Inc. v. Hanson, 491 A.2d 330 (R.I. 1985). · cites it 3× “1956 (1984 Reenactment) § 34-28-16, the section that designates the appropriate time period within which an appearance must be made and an account filed for purposes of lien enforcement.”
Roofing Concepts, Inc. v. Barry, 559 A.2d 1059 (R.I. 1989). · cites it 3× “The first motion requested that plaintiff be allowed to withdraw the funds deposited by defendants in the registry of court pursuant to § 34-28-17.”
Rosciti Constr., Inc. v. Lot 10 of East Greenwich Town Assessor's Plat 14, 754 F. Supp. 14 (D.R.I. 1991). · cites it 4× “Its entry as a party was timely under the mechanic’s lien statute, R.I.Gen.Laws § 34-28-16, and its removal notice, filed the day after the suit became “removable,” was timely as well.”
Rhode Island Constr. Servs., Inc. v. Harris Mill, LLC., Rhode Island Constr. Servs., Inc. v. Harris Mill, LLC, Thomas Lonardo & Assocs., Inc. v. Rhode Island Constr. Servs., Inc. (R.I. 2013). · cites it 10× “The motion justice recognized that § 34-28-16 allows the Superior Court to restore late claims in mechanics‟ lien actions if the claimant can show that its failure to file was due to “excusable neglect” as referenced in Rule 60(b) of the Superior Court Rules of Civil Procedure.”
R.I. Gen. Laws § 34-28-16(a): 3 cases
Rhode Island Constr. Servs., Inc. v. Harris Mill, LLC, 68 A.3d 450 (R.I. 2013). “The motion justice recognized that § 34-28-16 allows the Superior Court to restore late claims in mechanics’ lien actions if the claimant can show that its failure to file was due to “excusable neglect” as referenced in Rule 60(b) of the Superior Court Rules of Civil Procedure.”
Rosciti Constr., Inc. v. Lot 10 of East Greenwich Town Assessor's Plat 14, 754 F. Supp. 14 (D.R.I. 1991). “Its entry as a party was timely under the mechanic’s lien statute, R.I.Gen.Laws § 34-28-16, and its removal notice, filed the day after the suit became “removable,” was timely as well.”
Rhode Island Constr. Servs., Inc. v. Harris Mill, LLC., Rhode Island Constr. Servs., Inc. v. Harris Mill, LLC, Thomas Lonardo & Assocs., Inc. v. Rhode Island Constr. Servs., Inc. (R.I. 2013). “The motion justice recognized that § 34-28-16 allows the Superior Court to restore late claims in mechanics‟ lien actions if the claimant can show that its failure to file was due to “excusable neglect” as referenced in Rule 60(b) of the Superior Court Rules of Civil Procedure.”
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.