(a) The supreme court, the superior court, the family court, the district court, or the
traffic tribunal, may, at any time, in its discretion, dismiss actions at law and
other proceedings for lack of prosecution that have been pending for five (5) years
or more, after notice and opportunity for hearing.
(b) Notice that an action or proceeding will be in order for dismissal on a day certain
shall be given by the moving party (or by the clerk if upon the court’s own motion)
by mailing written notice to the attorney of record, or if there is no attorney of
record or the attorney is deceased, then to the party if his or her address appears
in the papers of the case. In the event there is no attorney of record, or he or she
is deceased, and the address of the party is unknown, notice may be given by insertion
of a newspaper advertisement published in a daily newspaper that has circulation in
the county or district where the action was instituted, at least once. A certificate
of the notice given shall be placed in the papers by the clerk.
Notes of Decisions
Rodriques v. Santos, 466 A.2d 306 (R.I. 1983).
· cites it 3× “1956 (1969 Reenactment) § 9-8-3. One of the provisions of Rule 41(b)(2) permits the Superior Court, in its discretion, on motion of the defendant, to dismiss any action for the plaintiff’s failure to prosecute.”
Furtado v. Laferriere, 839 A.2d 533 (R.I. 2004).
· cites it 4× “Although G.L.1956 § 9-8-3 and Rule 41(b)(1) of the Superior Court Rules of Civil Procedure require a five-year period of inactivity before a court can dismiss a case with prejudice for want of prosecution, no such five-year requirement exists for dismissing a case under Rule 4(…”
O'Donnell v. Twin City Fire Ins., 40 F. Supp. 2d 68 (D.R.I. 1999).
· cites it 4× ““Failure to prosecute” in Judge Famiglietta’s decision refers to a specific legal doctrine drawn from R.I. Gen.Laws § 9-8-3(a). Panciera’s counsel uses the same words in the Malpractice Complaint, but Panciera could succeed in her suit by proving plaintiffs’ failure either to…”
Finney Outdoor Advert. Co. v. Cordeiro, 485 A.2d 910 (R.I. 1984).
· cites it 2× “” General Laws 1956 (1969 Reenactment) § 9-8-3 “permits all courts, in their discretion, to dismiss any action or proceeding for lack of prosecution which has been pending for five years or more.”
Jones v. Nolan, 500 A.2d 529 (R.I. 1985).
· cites it 3× “1956 (1969 Reenactment) § 9-8-3, issued an order in a number of dormant cases, directing the attorneys of record to appear before the court on June 8, 1984, and show cause why their respective cases should not be dismissed “for lack of prosecution.”
R.I. Gen. Laws § 9-8-3(a): 1 case
O'Donnell v. Twin City Fire Ins., 40 F. Supp. 2d 68 (D.R.I. 1999).
““Failure to prosecute” in Judge Famiglietta’s decision refers to a specific legal doctrine drawn from R.I. Gen.Laws § 9-8-3(a). Panciera’s counsel uses the same words in the Malpractice Complaint, but Panciera could succeed in her suit by proving plaintiffs’ failure either to…”
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.