Burdick v. Town of Westerly
| Decision Date | 23 June 2022 |
| Docket Number | 2021-107-Appeal |
| Parties | Elizabeth Burdick v. Town of Westerly et al |
| Court | Rhode Island Supreme Court |
For Plaintiff:
Gregory Massad, Esq.
For Defendants:
Matthew T. Oliverio, Esq.
Clark W. Yudysky, Esq.
Suttell, C.J., Goldberg, Robinson, Lynch Prata, and Long, JJ.
ORDERThis case came before the Supreme Court for oral argument on April 6, 2022, pursuant to an order directing the parties to appear and show cause why the issues raised in this appeal should not be summarily decided. The plaintiff, Elizabeth Burdick, appeals from January 28, 2021 and January 29, 2021 final judgments entered by the Washington County Superior Court in favor of the defendants, the Town of Westerly (the Town), Christopher Duhamel, and Attorney Daniel Kinder.[1] The entry of final judgments followed orders granting the defendants' motions for summary judgment.
Having reviewed the papers filed with this Court and after hearing the arguments of counsel, we are of the opinion that cause has been shown. Accordingly, this case is assigned to the regular calendar for full briefing and argument. Briefing shall be in accordance with Article I, Rule 16 of the Supreme Court Rules of Appellate Procedure. The plaintiff shall file its opening brief, not to exceed 15,000 words, within forty (40) days of this order. The defendants shall have forty (40) days to file a responsive brief, not exceeding 15,000 words. The plaintiff may then file a reply brief within twenty (20) days after the filing of a brief by the defendants, not exceeding 7,500 words. It is so ordered.
---------
[1]Although there were additional defendants in the Superior Court, the plaintiff appeals only with respect to defendants Town of Westerly, Christopher Duhamel, and Attorney Daniel Kinder. Accordingly, these are the only defendants with whom this Court is concerned in the instant appeal.
---------
To continue reading
Request your trial