Opinions, Decisions, and Orders



Linda Zunda v. Town of Westerly by and through its Zoning Board of Review, Joseph Montesano, and Jean Marie Montesano, Trustee of the Jean Marie Montesano Trust u/a/d September 28, 20166/17/2024 4:00:00 AM;2024-06-17T04:00:00ZWC-2023-0081
North Farm Home Owners Association, Inc. v. Bristol County Water Authority6/14/2024 4:00:00 AM;2024-06-14T04:00:00Z2022-0167-Appeal.The plaintiff, North Farm Home Owners Association, Inc. (North Farm), appealed from a judgment of the Superior Court entering partial summary judgment on counts three and four of its third amended complaint in favor of the defendant, the Bristol County Water Authority (the BCWA). The hearing justice had granted summary judgment because he determined that no contract existed between the parties as a matter of law and thus that summary judgment was appropriate as to counts three and four, which sounded in breach of contract. On appeal, North Farm argued that the hearing justice erred because: the parties formed a valid contract by means of their 1993–1995 correspondence; the hearing justice ignored allegations in count four that the 2019 pass-through rate was illegal, as well as a breach of contract; and the hearing justice denied North Farm’s motion to amend without a finding of prejudice. The Supreme Court determined that the parties did not form a valid contract by means of their 1993–1995 correspondence because the letters exchanged between the parties did not display mutual assent to the material terms of the contract. Moreover, the hearing justice did not improperly grant summary judgment on count four based upon the lack of a valid contract because North Farm did not properly plead any basis for relief—beyond its claim for breach of contract and a declaratory judgment—in count four of its third amended complaint. The Supreme Court further determined that Rule 54(c) of the Superior Court Rules of Civil Procedure could not save North Farm’s unpleaded claim because North Farm was not successful in establishing its so-called discrimination claim before the hearing justice given that it failed to cite to any controlling legal authority to support this claim. Lastly, the Supreme Court determined that the hearing justice’s denial of North Farm’s motion to amend was not properly before the Court on appeal. Accordingly, the Supreme Court affirmed the hearing justice’s grant of summary judgment on counts three and four of North Farm’s third amended complaint.
Xavier T. Vidot v. Wayne T. Salisbury, Jr., et al. 6/13/2024 4:00:00 AM;2024-06-13T04:00:00Z2023-0286-Appeal.The plaintiff, Xavier T. Vidot, appealed from a June 14, 2023 order of the Superior Court granting the defendants’ motion to dismiss and denying his request for the issuance of a writ of mandamus and an injunction. The Supreme Court concluded that the actions for which the plaintiff sought equitable relief were discretionary in nature and were not ministerial duties and that, therefore, the plaintiff could not meet the requirements for such relief. Accordingly, the Court affirmed the order of the Superior Court.
Acting Presiding Justice (Krause, J.)6/13/2024 4:00:00 AM;2024-06-13T04:00:00Z2024-05
Mutual Properties Apple Valley, LLC v. State of Rhode Island Department of Business Regulation, Elizabeth Kelleher Dwyer, in her capacity as Director, Catherine Warren, in her capacity as hearing officer for the Department of Business Regulation, the Town6/13/2024 4:00:00 AM;2024-06-13T04:00:00ZPC-2023-2357
The Town of Warren v. The State Housing Appeals Board v. Last Ever Realty, LLC6/12/2024 4:00:00 AM;2024-06-12T04:00:00ZPC-2023-3477
Peter F. Neronha, Rhode Island Attorney General v. Prospect Medical Holdings, Inc.6/12/2024 4:00:00 AM;2024-06-12T04:00:00ZPC-2023-5832
Matters Allowed for Judicial Review6/12/2024 4:00:00 AM;2024-06-12T04:00:00Z2024-05
In re Ethics Advisory Panel (Appointment)6/12/2024 4:00:00 AM;2024-06-12T04:00:00Z2024-06
In re Amendments to Rules of the Rhode Island Supreme Court Ethics Advisory Panel (Immunity)6/7/2024 4:00:00 AM;2024-06-07T04:00:00Z