R.I. Gen. Laws
Rhode Island General Laws

R.I. Gen. Laws § 44-19-17 (2026)

Hearing by administrator on application

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

Any person aggrieved by any assessment, deficiency, or otherwise, shall notify the tax administrator, in writing, within thirty (30) days from the date of mailing by the tax administrator of the notice of the assessment and request a hearing relative to the assessment; and the tax administrator shall, as soon as practicable, fix a time and place for a hearing and shall, after the hearing, determine the correct amount of the tax, interest, and penalties. When a jeopardy assessment or determination is made, the hearing is not had unless the jeopardy assessment with penalties and interest has been paid.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases, 1966–1997 · leading case: Langton v. Brady Elec. Co., 216 A.2d 134 (R.I. 1966).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Langton v. Brady Elec. Co., 216 A.2d 134 (R.I. 1966). · cites it 6× “-such returns having 'been filed, the administrator, proceeding under the pertinent provisions of §44-19-14, made a determination of the taxes due the state and on July 26, 1961 gave the taxpayer notice in writing of the amount of such determination and of the requirement *368…”
Sportfisherman Charter, Inc. v. Norberg, 340 A.2d 143 (R.I. 1975). · cites it 6× “1956 (1970 Reenactment) § 44-19-17, the taxpayer requested a hearing to contest the deficiency determination.”
Sterling Shoe Co. v. Norberg, 411 F. Supp. 128 (D.R.I. 1976). · cites it 2× “G.L. § 44-19-17, and by the judiciary, R.”
Sterling Shoe Co. v. Langton, 240 A.2d 727 (R.I. 1968). · cites it 6× “Nevertheless, the administrator apparently treated it as being predicated on §44-19-17, as amended, with regard to the sales and use tax and §44-10-11, with respect to the unincorporated business tax.”
Herald Press, Inc. v. Norberg, 405 A.2d 1171 (R.I. 1979). “There we held that the Administrative Procedures Act supplanted certain portions of §44-10-11 and §44-19-17. We have also recently stated that review of a tax administrator’s decision is properly sought under the provisions of §42-35-15.”
Norberg v. Warwick Liquors, Inc., 265 A.2d 648 (R.I. 1970). · cites it 4× “5 In the circumstances, he is confined, as are we, to the record before us which consists only of the pleadings, the affidavits and the counter-affidavits, and the trial justice’s decision.”
Great Am. Nursing Centers, Inc. v. Norberg, 439 A.2d 249 (R.I. 1981). “In that case we held that the act had supplanted certain administrative remedies provided in § 44-10-11 and § 44-19-17. Also, in the area of unemployment compensation, we have held that § 42-35-15(a) implicitly repealed cer *252 tain standing requirements for those contesting…”
Dart Indus., Inc. v. Clark, 696 A.2d 306 (R.I. 1997). “Dart sought administrative review of the assessment pursuant to § 44-19-17. A formal hearing was held under the Rhode Island Administrative Procedures Act, G.”
Langton v. Demers, 230 A.2d 870 (R.I. 1967). · cites it 2× “The hearing sought and given the taxpayer as the result of his receiving the original notice of the deficiency due the state was afforded him pursuant to §44-19-17, as amended. 2 Any petition for judicial review of an assessment made by the administrator, however, is conditioned…”
Mart Realty, Inc. v. Norberg, 303 A.2d 361 (R.I. 1973). “1 General Laws 1956 (1970 Reenactment) §44-19-17 reads as follows: “Hearing by administrator on' application.”
Lily Truck Leasing Corp. v. Clark, 556 A.2d 565 (R.I. 1989). “1956 (1988 Reenactment) § 44-19-17. This administrative hearing resulted in a final administrative decision upholding the deficiency determination issued by the tax administrator on August 3, 1984.”
Church of Pan, Inc. v. Norberg, 445 A.2d 294 (R.I. 1982). · cites it 2× “We were not persuaded by these arguments and are of the opinion that the wording of § 44-19-17 provides for a contested hearing to “[a]ny person aggrieved by any assessment, deficiency or otherwise * * (Emphasis added.”
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.