Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Hargreaves v. Jack

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Decided May 12, 2000No. 98-563-AppealPublished

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partFlanders, Justice

For the reasons stated by the Court and for those set forth in rñy dissenting opinion in Kaya v. Partington, 681 A.2d 256, 267-71 (R.I.1996) (Flanders, J. dissenting), I agree that the so-called Injured On Duty (IOD) statute, G.L.1956 chapter 19 of title 45, does not bar plaintiff from pursuing her surviving spouse’s remedy under the Wrongful Death Act (WDA), G.L.1956 chapter 7 of title 10. But for these same reasons I also do not believe that the IOD statute bars plaintiff from recovering under §§ 10-7-5 and 10-7-7 of the WDA for her deceased husband’s pain and suffering and for the lost…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Kaya v. PartingtonSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1996
  2. Aldcroft v. Fidelity & Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Rhode Island · 1969
  3. Folan v. STATE/DCYFSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1999
  4. Manzotti v. Amica Mutual Insurance CompanySupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1997

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

Powered by the Exa API