The decision of any official, board, agent, or other person appointed by the state
concerning any controversy arising under or in connection with the solicitation or
award of a contract shall be entitled to a presumption of correctness. The decision
shall not be disturbed unless it was: procured by fraud; in violation of constitutional
or statutory provisions; in excess of the statutory authority of the agency; made
upon unlawful procedure; affected by other error or law; clearly erroneous in view
of the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence on the whole record; arbitrary;
capricious; characterized by an abuse of discretion; or clearly unwarranted exercise
of discretion.
Notes of Decisions
Associated Builders & Contractors of Rhode Island, Inc. v. Dep't of Admin., 787 A.2d 1179 (R.I. 2002).
· cites it 4× “” *1188 Section 37-2-51 establishes a “presumption of correctness” for state procurement decisions: “The decision of any official, board, agent, or other person appointed by the state concerning any controversy arising under or in connection with the solicitation or award of a…”
H v. Collins Co. v. Williams, 990 A.2d 845 (R.I. 2010).
· cites it 2× “The trial justice’s decision was based on G.L.1956 § 37-2-51 that provides: “The decision of any official, board, agent, or other person appointed by the state concerning any controversy arising under or in connection with the solicitation or award of a contract shall be…”
Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Rhode Island v. Najarian, 865 A.2d 1074 (R.I. 2005).
· cites it 2× “While expressly recognizing the strict requirements that must be met to overturn a public awarding authority’s decision, the trial justice below concluded that the contract was awarded in violation of statutory provisions and upon unlawful procedure and that the award was…”
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.