Fletcher v. Bd. of Aldermen of City of Newport
| Decision Date | 30 October 1911 |
| Citation | 81 A. 193,33 R.I. 388 |
| Parties | FLETCHER v. BOARD OF ALDERMEN OF CITY OF NEWPORT. |
| Court | Rhode Island Supreme Court |
Case certified from Superior Court, Newport County; Darius Baker, Judge.
Appeal by Malene A. Fletcher from a decree of the Board of Aldermen of the City of Newport establishing a street extension. Certified from Superior Court, under Gen. Laws 1909, c. 298, § 5.
Burdick & MacLeod, for appellant.
Jeremiah A. Sullivan, City Sol., for appellee.
On July 7, 1910, the respondent board of aldermen of the city of Newport entered a "decree establishing Washington street extension" in said city, from which decree an appeal was seasonably taken to the superior court for Newport county and certain reasons of appeal were duly filed by the appellant. After the time for perfecting said appeal had expired, and before trial on the merits, on motion of the appellant on April 3, 1911, the reasons of appeal were amended by an order of the superior court by adding thereto the following, viz.: —and thereafterwards on the same day said court certified to this court, under the provisions of section 5, c. 298, Gen. Laws 1909, the two following questions as being questions "which have been raised" and are of such doubt and importance as to require the determination of this court before further proceedings are had in the superior court. The questions so certified are these:
A fatal objection to the certification of both these questions is this: That it nowhere appears on the record that they have been at any time brought before the superior court for judicial determination. Apparently it was considered sufficient for such certification that such questions might be involved somewhere in the action and might possibly be raised at some stage of it. But that is not sufficient to justify such a certification. The certification should be made only after...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mendes v. Factor
...(1911). Further, "the superior court should refuse to permit an amendment constituting an immaterial reason of appeal to be made." Id. at 388, 81 A. at 193-94. jurisdiction to permit such an amendment being granted only 'for cause shown, ' the granting of such permission is an adjudication ......
-
Town Of Bristol v. Nolan, 1740.
...in the ruling or decision upon the particular issue then pending for decision by the superior court. Fletcher v. Board of Aldermen of City of Newport, 33 R.I. 388, 81 A. 193; Easton v. Fessenden, 63 R.I. 11, 6 A.2d 714; Spaulding v. Martin, 66 R.I. 367, 19 A.2d 305. Thus these two sections ......
-
In re Christopher S.
...formally raised on the record and in some appropriate proceeding it is presented to the trial court." Fletcher v. Board of Aldermen of Newport, 33 R.I. 388, 390, 81 A. 193, 193 (1911). See also Tillinghast v. Johnson, 34 R.I. 136, 139, 82 A. 788, 790 (1912) (holding that a certified questio......
-
Mendes v. Factor, C.A. No. PP-2009-1820
...to determine among other questions the materiality or the immateriality of the amendment proposed." Fletcher v. Bd. of Aldermen of Newport, 33 R.I. 388, 388, 81 A. 193, 193 (1911). Further, "the superior court should refuse to permit an amendment constituting an immaterial reason of appeal ......