Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Amico's Inc. v. Mattos

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Decided February 15, 2002No. 2001-118-AppealPublished

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partGoldberg, Justice

Although I wholeheartedly endorse the judgment in this case, I would have arrived at this result with greater restraint. I am of the opinion that municipalities have never been authorized by the General Assembly to prohibit and regulate smoking in restaurants and “victualing houses.” Moreover, in my judgment, the Legisla*909ture, by its enactment of G.L.1956 § 23-20.6-2(e)(l) prohibiting smoking in certain enumerated public places, including “[elating facilities with a seating capacity of fifty (50) or more persons” has preempted the field of regulation as it relates to restaurants and…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Nugent Ex Rel. Hurd v. City of East ProvidenceSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1968
  2. El Marocco Club, Inc. v. RichardsonSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 2000
  3. Sepe v. DanekerSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1949
  4. Town of Warren v. Thornton-WhitehouseSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1999
  5. Thompson v. Town of East GreenwichSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1986

7 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