R.I. Gen. Laws
Rhode Island General Laws

R.I. Gen. Laws § 6-16-9 (2026)

Extinguishment of claim for relief

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

A claim for relief with respect to a transfer or obligation under this chapter is extinguished unless action is brought:

(1) Under § 6-16-4(a)(1), not later than four (4) years after the transfer was made or the obligation was incurred or, if later, not later than one year after the transfer or obligation was or could reasonably have been discovered by the claimant;

(2) Under § 6-16-4(a)(2) or § 6-16-5(a), not later than four (4) years after the transfer was made or the obligation was incurred; or

(3) Under § 6-16-5(b), not later than one year after the transfer was made or the obligation was incurred.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2000–2025 · leading case: Supreme Bakery, Inc. v. Bagley, 742 A.2d 1202 (R.I. 2000).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Supreme Bakery, Inc. v. Bagley, 742 A.2d 1202 (R.I. 2000). · cites it 9× “The trial justice issued a bench decision in favor of defendants, finding that the statute of limitations as set forth in G.L. 1956 § 6-16-9(a) barred Supreme’s claim and that Supreme did not fall into the discovery exception to that statute.”
Duffy v. Dwyer, 847 A.2d 266 (R.I. 2004). · cites it 5× “Section 6-16-9(1). Section 6-16 — 6(l)(i) dictates that, “[flor the purposes of this chapter,” a transfer of real property has been made “when the transfer is so far perfected that a good faith purchaser of the asset from the debtor against whom applicable law permits the…”
Rohm & Haas Co. v. Capuano, 301 F. Supp. 2d 156 (D.R.I. 2004). · cites it 6× “Indeed, section 6-16-9(1) contains a discovery rule, which provides that causes of action brought under § 6-16-4(a)(1) must be brought within four years of the transfer, or “within one year after the transfer or obligation was or could reasonably have been discovered by the…”
Richardson v. Preston (Antex, Inc.), 397 B.R. 168 (1st Cir. BAP 2008). · cites it 2× “R.I. Gen. Laws § 6-16-9(2). In this ease, the subject transfers occurred between September 26, 2002 and February 22, 2005.”
Finn v. All. Bank, 838 N.W.2d 585 (Minn. Ct. App. 2013). “§ 5109 (1999); R.I. Gen. Laws § 6-16-9 (2001); S.D. Codified Laws § 54 -8A-9 (2004); Tenn.”
United States v. Hatch (D.R.I. 2025). · cites it 2× “§ 6-16-9. There is an exception for claims brought under § 6-16-4(a)(1), but only for up to “one year after the transfer or obligation was or could reasonably have been discovered by the claimant.”
United States v. Hatch (D.R.I. 2025). · cites it 2× “§ 6-16-9. There is an exception for claims brought under § 6-16-4(a)(1), but only for up to “one year after the transfer or obligation was or could reasonably have been discovered by the claimant.”
— R.I. Gen. Laws § 6-16-9(1) — 4 cases
Duffy v. Dwyer, 847 A.2d 266 (R.I. 2004). “Section 6-16-9(1). Section 6-16 — 6(l)(i) dictates that, “[flor the purposes of this chapter,” a transfer of real property has been made “when the transfer is so far perfected that a good faith purchaser of the asset from the debtor against whom applicable law permits the…”
Rohm & Haas Co. v. Capuano, 301 F. Supp. 2d 156 (D.R.I. 2004). “Indeed, section 6-16-9(1) contains a discovery rule, which provides that causes of action brought under § 6-16-4(a)(1) must be brought within four years of the transfer, or “within one year after the transfer or obligation was or could reasonably have been discovered by the…”
United States v. Hatch (D.R.I. 2025). “§ 6-16-9. There is an exception for claims brought under § 6-16-4(a)(1), but only for up to “one year after the transfer or obligation was or could reasonably have been discovered by the claimant.”
United States v. Hatch (D.R.I. 2025). “§ 6-16-9. There is an exception for claims brought under § 6-16-4(a)(1), but only for up to “one year after the transfer or obligation was or could reasonably have been discovered by the claimant.”
— R.I. Gen. Laws § 6-16-9(2) — 2 cases
Rohm & Haas Co. v. Capuano, 301 F. Supp. 2d 156 (D.R.I. 2004). “Indeed, section 6-16-9(1) contains a discovery rule, which provides that causes of action brought under § 6-16-4(a)(1) must be brought within four years of the transfer, or “within one year after the transfer or obligation was or could reasonably have been discovered by the…”
Richardson v. Preston (Antex, Inc.), 397 B.R. 168 (1st Cir. BAP 2008). “R.I. Gen. Laws § 6-16-9(2). In this ease, the subject transfers occurred between September 26, 2002 and February 22, 2005.”
— R.I. Gen. Laws § 6-16-9(a) — 1 case
Supreme Bakery, Inc. v. Bagley, 742 A.2d 1202 (R.I. 2000). “The trial justice issued a bench decision in favor of defendants, finding that the statute of limitations as set forth in G.L. 1956 § 6-16-9(a) barred Supreme’s claim and that Supreme did not fall into the discovery exception to that statute.”
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.