R.I. Gen. Laws
Rhode Island General Laws

R.I. Gen. Laws § 8-8-28 (2026)

Burden of proof in tax cases

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

In all tax cases before the court, and upon appeal therefrom, a preponderance of the evidence shall suffice to sustain the burden of proof. The burden of proof shall fall upon the party seeking affirmative relief and the burden of going forward with the evidence shall shift as in other civil litigation. In any proceedings in which the division of taxation alleges fraud or an exception to the normal statute of limitations on assessment, the burden of proof in respect of that issue shall be upon the division of taxation. To be sustained on the issue of fraud, the division of taxation must sustain a burden of clear and convincing proof.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1997–2009 · leading case: DeBlois v. Clark, 764 A.2d 727 (R.I. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
DeBlois v. Clark, 764 A.2d 727 (R.I. 2001). · cites it 13× “It is our conclusion that domicile is established by a preponderance of the evidence pursuant to the unambiguous burden of proof established by G.L. 1956 § 8-8-28, and we conclude that the petitioners were Florida domiciliaries during the years in question.”
In Re Tax Assessment of Foster Found.'s Woodlands Ret. Cmty., 672 S.E.2d 150 (W. Va. 2009). · cites it 2× “427 (Oregon 2005); R.I. Gen. Laws § 8-8-28 (1984); Tex. [Tax] Code Ann.”
Dart Indus., Inc. v. Clark, 696 A.2d 306 (R.I. 1997). “” In the District Court, the burden of production and persuasion in tax appeals “shall fall upon the party seeking affirmative relief,” § 8-8-28, in this ease, Dart. Dart conceded that the property assessed by the tax division was stored or used within Rhode Island and, hence,…”
White v. Clark, 823 A.2d 1125 (R.I. 2003). · cites it 2× “” Section 8-8-28. The threshold for proving reasonable probability of success on the merits in the context of a motion for exemption from prepayment is less than the burden of proof required to reach a decision on the merits.”
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.