Doe v. LaBrosse

625 A.2d 222, 1993 WL 191153
CourtSupreme Court of Rhode Island
DecidedMay 21, 1993
Docket90-97-Appeal
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 625 A.2d 222 (Doe v. LaBrosse) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Doe v. LaBrosse, 625 A.2d 222, 1993 WL 191153 (R.I. 1993).

Opinion

ORDER

This matter was before the Supreme Court pursuant to an order directing all parties to appear and show cause why this petition for certiorari should not be denied and dismissed and the case remanded to the Superior Court in light of the General Assembly’s enactment of G.L.1956 (1985 Reenactment) § 9-1-51.

This case had previously been considered by the court Frances Doe & Karen Doe v. LaBrosse, Sr., 588 A.2d 605 (R.I.1991). In that opinion this court had considered and had granted a petition for certiorari following a denial of defendant’s motion for summary judgment in a civil sexual assault case. We remanded that case to the Superior Court for an evidentiary hearing following which the trial justice was to determine the date plaintiffs discovered, or with all due diligence should have reasonably discovered, the causal connection between defendant’s alleged acts and the plaintiff’s alleged injuries. Following that hearing the matter was returned to the Supreme Court.

In the meantime, the General Assembly enacted § 9-1-51, of the General Laws which created a discovery rule regarding limitation of actions on the crimes of sexual abuse and the exploitation of children. The statute was made applicable by the Legislature to all causes of action pending on the date of passage of the act or filed thereafter.

After reviewing the memoranda submitted by the parties and after hearing their counsel in oral argument, it is the conclusion of this court that our review under the writ of certiorari issued should not occur. This case must be remanded back to the Superior Court for further proceedings in which the Presiding Justice will apply the newly enacted statute to his findings of fact. Nothing in this order will preclude the Presiding Justice from making further findings which, in his opinion, are necessary and appropriate.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Martin v. Howard
784 A.2d 291 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 2001)
Kelly v. Marcantonio
678 A.2d 873 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
625 A.2d 222, 1993 WL 191153, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/doe-v-labrosse-ri-1993.