Casale v. City of Cranston

OPINION

Justice GOLDBERG, for the Court.

On December 6, 2011, the defendant, City of Cranston (defendant or city), came before the Supreme Court on appeal from a Superior Court judgment in favor of the plaintiff, James Casale (plaintiff or Cá-sale), in an action for declaratory judgment. The defendant argues that the trial justice erred by misinterpreting G.L.1956 § 45-19-1.1, and finding that the city was not entitled to reimbursement from the proceeds of the plaintiffs uninsured motorist (UM) benefits. 1 We affirm the Superi- or Court’s judgment in favor of the plaintiff.

Facts and Travel

The…