R.I. Gen. Laws
Rhode Island General Laws

R.I. Gen. Laws § 44-5-30 (2026)

Judgment on petition

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

(a) On the trial of the petition, either with or without a jury, it appears that the taxpayer’s real estate, tangible personal property, or intangible personal property has been assessed in excess of the provisions of § 44-5-12 or if it appears that the tax assessed is illegal in whole or in part, the court shall give judgment that the sum by which the taxpayer has been so overtaxed, or illegally taxed, with their costs, be deducted from their tax; but if the taxpayer’s tax be paid, whether before or after the filing of the petition, then the court shall give judgment for the petitioner for the sum by which the petitioner has been so overtaxed, or illegally taxed, plus the amount of any penalty paid on the tax, with interest from the date on which the tax and penalty were paid and costs, which judgment shall be paid to the petitioner by the city or town treasurer out of the treasury.

(b) If, however, on the trial of the petition related to tangible personal property and/or real estate, either with or without a jury, it appears that as it relates to tangible personal property the taxpayer has failed to file a required account or has fraudulently concealed or omitted any information from their account, or if it appears that the assessors have not assessed either the taxpayer’s tangible personal property or real estate at a value in excess of the provisions of § 44-5-12, and that the taxpayer has not been illegally taxed, the assessors shall have judgment and execution for their costs.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1963–1992 · leading case: Gott v. Norberg, 417 A.2d 1352 (R.I. 1980).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Gott v. Norberg, 417 A.2d 1352 (R.I. 1980). · cites it 2× “…provides for 7-percent interest on refunds on overpayments for the admissions tax to racing events. [4] General Laws of 1956 (1970 Reenactment): § 44-19-26 (sales and use taxes); § 44-20-49 (cigarette taxes); § 44-22-24, § 44-22-25, § 44-23-33 (estate and transfer taxes);…”
Sayles Finishing Plants, Inc. v. Toomey, 188 A.2d 91 (R.I. 1963). · cites it 8× “Moreover, it urges that if the water rights in question should have been separately designated and valued, the omission was not *95 fraudulent as presently required by § 44-5-30. In this regard petitioner relates the history of § 44-5-30, showing that when the Coventry Co.”
Briggs Drive, Inc. v. Moorehead, 239 A.2d 186 (R.I. 1968). · cites it 3× “” (§§44-5-30 and 44-5-31) We have recited the statutory history at some length primarily because a reference to that history is essential to a consideration of the view urged by plaintiffs during oral argument.”
Cabana v. Littler, 612 A.2d 678 (R.I. 1992). “The plaintiffs correctly assert that § 44-5-30 and § 44-5-31 provide the exclusive statutory remedy for an illegal tax and require that the court enter judgment for the petitioner for the sum illegally taxed plus statutory interest and costs.”
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.