From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Payne v. Superior Court for Providence

Supreme Court of Rhode Island
Jul 20, 1951
78 R.I. 188 (R.I. 1951)

Opinion

M. P. No. 973.

July 20, 1951, Decided

Everett D. Higgins, Harold E. Staples, Edwin H. Hastings, all of Providence, for petitioners.

William E. Powers, Atty. Gen., Robert A. Coogan, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

William E. McCabe, City Sol., James J. Corrigan, Asst. City Sol., Providence, for City of Providence.


PER CURIAM.

After our decision in the above case the petitioners asked and received permission to file a motion for reargument. Pursuant to this permission they have filed such a motion, setting out therein certain reasons on which they base their contention that justice requires a reargument of the case. We have carefully considered those reasons and we are of the opinion that they are without merit.

Motion denied.


Summaries of

Payne v. Superior Court for Providence

Supreme Court of Rhode Island
Jul 20, 1951
78 R.I. 188 (R.I. 1951)
Case details for

Payne v. Superior Court for Providence

Case Details

Full title:Mary Dexter PAYNE et al. v. The SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF PROVIDENCE

Court:Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Date published: Jul 20, 1951

Citations

78 R.I. 188 (R.I. 1951)
78 R.I. 188
1951 R.I. LEXIS 116

Citing Cases

Taveira v. Solomon

It is a flexible rule; one more in the nature of a rule of policy and convenience. * * * Nevertheless it is…

State v. Silva

See State v. Presler, 731 A.2d 699, 705 (R.I. 1999) (“The law-of-the-case doctrine ‘posits that when a court…