Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
McKenna v. Williams
Supreme Court of Rhode Island
Decided June 6, 2005No. 2005-144-M.PPublishedCited by 54 opinions
1Concurring in part, dissenting in part
OPINION
Goldberg, Flaherty, and Robinson, Justices,
with whom Suttell, Justice, concurs in part, dissents in part, and joins in the judgment.
This case came before the Supreme Court for oral argument on May 24, 2005, pursuant to an order directing the parties to appear and show cause why the issues raised in the petition for certiorari should not summarily be decided. After hearing the arguments of counsel for the parties and examining their memoranda, we are of the opinion that cause has not been shown and that the issues raised in this petition should be decided at this time.
The…
2Cases cited60 opinions
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Baker v. CarrSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Flast v. CohenSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Hines v. DavidowitzSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Caminetti v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1917
55 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by54 opinions
- Bowen v. MollisSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 2008
- Elizabeth Boyer v. Chief Judge Haiganush BedrosianSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 2012
- Jennifer Swain v. Estate of Shelley A. Tyre by and through James H. Reilly as Administrator d.b.n, c.t.a.Supreme Court of Rhode Island · 2012
- N & M Properties, LLC v. Town of West Warwick Ex Rel. MooreSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 2009
- Narragansett Indian Tribe v. State of Rhode Island and UTGR, Inc. d/b/a Twin River and Newport Grand, LLC,IntervenorSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 2014
49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.