(a) Any person, who is maliciously subjected to an act or acts which would reasonably
be construed as intended to harass or intimidate the person because of his or her
race, religion, or national origin, may bring an action in the superior court against
the perpetrator of the act or acts for compensatory damages including damages for
emotional distress. The court, in its discretion, may also restrain and enjoin such
future acts by the defendant.
(b) If any provision or part of this section or the application thereof to any person
or circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity shall not affect other provisions
or applications of the section which can be given effect without the invalid provision
or application, and to this end the provisions or parts of this section are severable.
Notes of Decisions
Lopera v. Town of Coventry, 640 F.3d 388 (1st Cir. 2011).
· cites it 2× “" R.I. Gen. Laws § 9-1-35(a). For the reasons stated above, the players have not raised a genuine issue of material fact that satisfies either of these standards.”
Lopera v. Town of Coventry, 652 F. Supp. 2d 203 (D.R.I. 2009).
· cites it 4× “2-3, and Ethnic Intimidation Statute, R.I. Gen. Laws § 9-1-35. Both statutes require discriminatory animus.”
Lipscomb v. State of Rhode Island (D.R.I. 2025).
· cites it 5× “2-3; and (4) the Rhode Island Ethnic Intimidation Statute, R.I. Gen. Laws § 9-1-35. Pl.’s Am. Pleadings Civ.”
Lopera v. Town of Coventry (1st Cir. 2011).
“" R.I. Gen. Laws § 9-1-35(a). For the reasons -30- stated above, the players have not raised a genuine issue of material fact that satisfies either of these standards.”
— R.I. Gen. Laws § 9-1-35(a) — 3 cases
Lopera v. Town of Coventry, 640 F.3d 388 (1st Cir. 2011).
“" R.I. Gen. Laws § 9-1-35(a). For the reasons stated above, the players have not raised a genuine issue of material fact that satisfies either of these standards.”
Lopera v. Town of Coventry (1st Cir. 2011).
“" R.I. Gen. Laws § 9-1-35(a). For the reasons -30- stated above, the players have not raised a genuine issue of material fact that satisfies either of these standards.”
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.