Except as otherwise provided, in all civil cases in the district court, any party
may cause the case to be removed for trial on all questions of law and fact to the
superior court for the county in which division the suit is pending by claiming an
appeal from the judgment of the district court, in writing, filed with the clerk of
the division within two (2) days, exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays,
after the judgment is entered; provided, that the party claiming the appeal, at the
time of claiming the appeal, shall pay to the clerk all costs, including an attorney’s
fee of fifty dollars ($50.00), for the party or parties adversely interested in the
judgment, to be paid by the clerk to the attorney for the adverse party. The attorney’s
fee of fifty dollars ($50.00) shall be divided equally among the attorneys for the
parties adversely interested when more than one adverse party is involved; and provided,
further, that costs shall not be taxed, exclusive of the attorney’s fee, at a sum
not less than twenty-five dollars ($25.00), in addition to a technology surcharge
assessed in accordance with § 8-15-11.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
24
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1959–2025 · leading case:
Jones v. Aciz, 289 A.2d 44 (R.I. 1972).
Jones v. Aciz, 289 A.2d 44 (R.I. 1972).
· cites it 22× “1956 (1969 Reenactment) §9-12-10, as amended, 1 and the bond required by §9-12-12.”
Pridemore v. Napolitano, 689 A.2d 1053 (R.I. 1997).
· cites it 8× “The proper time for filing the appeal to the Superior Court under G.L.1956 § 9-12-10 was within two days (exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays) of entry of judgment on November 29,1993, not within two days of the oral decision.”
Oaks v. Dist. Court of State of RI, 631 F. Supp. 538 (D.R.I. 1986).
· cites it 5× “G.L. § 9-12-10. 1 A procedure exists to claim a jury trial in the superior court proceedings.”
Burns Elec. Supply Co. v. Westmoreland, 356 A.2d 479 (R.I. 1976).
· cites it 4× “Section 9-12-10 provides that in all civil cases in the District Court any party, with the exception of one seeking possession of tenements let, may cause his case to be removed for trial on all questions of fact and law to the Superior Court by claiming an appeal from the…”
Val-Gioia Props., LLC v. Blamires, 18 A.3d 545 (R.I. 2011).
· cites it 3× “When a case is appealed to Superior Court, G.L.1956 § 9-12-10 provides in pertinent part that: “in all civil cases in the [District [Cjourt, any party may cause the case to be removed for trial on all questions of law and fact to the [Sjuperior [Cjourt for the county in which…”
Oberlander v. Gen. Motors Corp., 798 A.2d 376 (R.I. 2002).
· cites it 2× “Moreover, G.L. 1956 § 9-12-10 states that “all questions of law and fact” may be removed for trial de novo in the Superior Court.”
Downtown Grp., LLC v. Tine, 769 A.2d 621 (R.I. 2001).
· cites it 2× “In an ejectment action pursuant to G.L. 1956 § 34-18.1-1 et seq. for possession of the premises and nonpayment of rent under the terms of a commercial lease, the parties have a statutory right to appeal the judgment of the District Court and are entitled to a de novo hearing by…”
Carlson v. Bedford, 828 A.2d 516 (R.I. 2003).
· cites it 2× “According to G.L. 1956 § 9-12-10, respondents had two days, “exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays after the judgment is entered” to remove the case to the Superior Court for a de novo trial.”
Finney Outdoor Advert. Co. v. Cordeiro, 485 A.2d 910 (R.I. 1984).
“1956 (1969 Reenactment) § 9-12-10. “The availability of a hearing de novo at the Superior Court level clearly grants an appellant the right to have the [Superior Court justice] use his independent judgment in ruling on the merits of the case.”
Putnam Furniture Leasing Co., Inc. v. Borden, 539 A.2d 73 (R.I. 1988).
“General Laws 1956 (1985 Reenactment) § 9-12-10 provides in pertinent portion that in all civil cases in the District Court any party may cause such case to be removed for trial on all questions of law and fact to the Superior Court by filing a written appeal from the judgment of…”
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.