R.I. Gen. Laws
Rhode Island General Laws

R.I. Gen. Laws § 38-2-10 (2026)

Burden of proof

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

In all actions brought under this chapter, the burden shall be on the public body to demonstrate that the record in dispute can be properly withheld from public inspection under the terms of this chapter.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1989–2016 · leading case: 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).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
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). · cites it 2× “” Section 38-2-10. What the Journal fails to recognize in making this argument is that the FOIA contains a nearly identical statutory provision.”
Rhode Island Fed'n of Teachers, AFT v. Sundlun, 595 A.2d 799 (R.I. 1991). · cites it 3× “An examination of the entire statute leads us to conclude that the remedies provided by APRA are set forth in § 38-2-7 through § 38-2-10. These sections are set forth in full as follows: “38-2-7.”
Pawtucket Teachers All. Local No. 920 v. Brady, 556 A.2d 556 (R.I. 1989). “An examination of the lower court’s decision, however, reveals that the trial justice succinctly stated and then properly allocated the burden of proof under § 38-2-10. We therefore reject the plaintiffs’ contention as without merit.”
Robinson v. Malinoff, 770 A.2d 873 (R.I. 2001). · cites it 2× “G.L.1956 § 38-2-10. The City of Newport and its city manager were not parties in the summary judgment motion and hearing.”
Ri Fed'n of Teachers v. Sundlun, 595 A.2d 799 (R.I. 1991). · cites it 3× “An examination of the entire statute leads us to conclude that the remedies provided by APRA are set forth in § 38-2-7 through § 38-2-10. These sections are set forth in full as follows: "38-2-7.”
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.