Legal Opinion · Dissent

Webster v. Perrotta

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Decided June 27, 2001No. 2000-333-AppealPublished

1DissentFlanders, Justice

I respectfully dissent. The grounds for my disagreement with the majority are as follows:(1) Rule 37 of the Superior Court Rules of Civil Procedure, not Rule 55, is the operative rule governing the judgments

that entered in this case. Applying Rule 55, the majority declares that the “final judgments” that entered in this case as sanctions for the town’s noncompliance with the court’s orders concerning plaintiffs’ discovery demands were void to the extent that they purported to award the relief that plaintiffs had requested in the complaints, and to the extent they included a specific mandate…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 98,322 Securities and Exchange Commission v. First Financial Group of Texas, Inc., William H. HowtonCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1981
  2. Jolicoeur Furniture Co., Inc. v. BaldelliSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1995
  3. O'BRIEN v. StateSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1989
  4. Allstate Insurance v. LombardiSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 2001
  5. Astors' Beechwood v. People Coal Co.Supreme Court of Rhode Island · 1995

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API