Rhode Island General Laws
R.I. Gen. Laws § 38-2-1 (2026)
Purpose
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
RI-LEGwebserver.rilegislature.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
The public’s right to access to public records and the individual’s right to dignity and privacy are both recognized to be principles of the utmost importance in a free society. The purpose of this chapter is to facilitate public access to public records. It is also the intent of this chapter to protect from disclosure information about particular individuals maintained in the files of public bodies when disclosure would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 28
cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1982–2025 · leading case: In Re New England Gas Co., 842 A.2d 545 (R.I. 2004).
In Re New England Gas Co., 842 A.2d 545 (R.I. 2004). “G.L. § 38-2-1 et seq.” Rule 1.2(g)(2). Thus, as the rules make manifest, a party may request only a “preliminary *553 finding” that submitted documents are exempt under the APRA; it has no ability under the rules to challenge the commission’s decision to release the documents…”
Providence Journal Co. v. Convention Ctr. Auth., 774 A.2d 40 (R.I. 2001). “Documents that Resulted from Negotiations The stated purpose of APRA is set forth in § 38-2-1. It provides: "The public's right to access [public] records * * * and the individual's right to dignity and privacy are both recognized to be principles of the utmost importance in a…”
Town of Johnston v. Santilli, 892 A.2d 123 (R.I. 2006). “For example, in matters concerning bidding, contracts, tort defense, and issues arising under G.L.1956 § 38-2-1 (public records) and G.”
Pontbriand v. Sundlun, 699 A.2d 856 (R.I. 1997). “” Section 38-2-1. Information deemed “not * * * public” and not subject to release includes “financial information obtained from a person * * * which is of a privileged or confidential nature,” section 38-2-2(d)(2), and “[r]ecords, reports * * * required to be kept confidential…”
Direct Action for Rights & Equality v. Gannon, 819 A.2d 651 (R.I. 2003). “It is also the intent of this chapter to protect from disclosure information about particular individuals maintained in the files of public bodies when disclosure would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.”
The Providence Journal Co. v. The Rhode Island Dep't of Pub. Saf., by & through Peter Kilmartin, Attorney Gen., 136 A.3d 1168 (R.I. 2016). “” Section 38-2-1, as enacted by P.L. 1979, ch.”
In Re Island Hi-Speed Ferry, LLC., 852 A.2d 524 (R.I. 2004). “G.L. § 38-2-1 et seq. Except where the Commission directs otherwise, all pleadings, orders, communications, exhibits and other documents shall become matters of public record as of the day and time of their filing.”
Interstate Navigation Co. v. Div. of Pub. Utils. & Carriers of the State, 824 A.2d 1282 (R.I. 2003). “The Access to Public Records Act (APRA), G.L.1956 § 38-2-1 provides that the public shall have access to public records, subject to certain restrictions such as disclosure that would constitute an invasion of privacy.”
Hydron Labs., Inc. v. DEPT. OF ATTY. GEN., 492 A.2d 135 (R.I. 1985). “More specifically, § 38-2-1 of APRA states that, "[t]he purpose of this chapter is to facilitate public access to governmental records which pertain to the policy-making functions of public bodies and/or are relevant to the public health, safety, and welfare.”
Direct Action for Rights & Equality v. Gannon, 713 A.2d 218 (R.I. 1998). “The stated purpose of the APRA is codified at § 38-2-1 and reads: "The public's right to access to records pertaining to the policy making responsibilities of government and the individual's right to dignity and privacy are both recognized to be principles of the utmost…”
The Rake v. Gorodetsky, 452 A.2d 1144 (R.I. 1982). “General Laws 1956 (1977 Reenactment) §§ 38-2-1 through 38-2-12, as enacted by P.”
Pawtucket Teachers All. Local No. 920 v. Brady, 556 A.2d 556 (R.I. 1989). “” Section 38-2-1. 3 We are mindful that the basic policy of the act is in favor of disclosure.”
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.