Sherman v. Price

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Sherman v. Price

632 A.2d 643, 1993 R.I. LEXIS 227, 1993 WL 442435

CourtSupreme Court of Rhode Island

DecidedNovember 2, 1993

DocketNo. 92-307-Appeal

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 632 A.2d 643 (Sherman v. Price) 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

Sherman v. Price, 632 A.2d 643, 1993 R.I. LEXIS 227, 1993 WL 442435 (R.I. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

This case came before the court for oral argument on September 28, 1993, pursuant to an order that had directed the defendants, Lenna W. Price and Francis Price Dwyer, to appear in order to show cause why the issues raised in this appeal should not be summarily decided.

After hearing the arguments of counsel and examining the memoranda filed by the parties, we are of the opinion that cause has not been shown.

The evidence submitted by the plaintiffs, William H. Sherman and Sandra L. Sherman, sustained their burden of proving that they had openly, notoriously, and adversely possessed the disputed nine-inch strip of land for a period in excess of the statutory period of ten years. See Locke v. O’Brien, 610 A.2d 562, 555 (R.I.1992). We also believe that the trial justice was legally correct in granting the plaintiffs’ motion for a directed verdict in respect to the counterclaim filed by the defendants. She analyzed the evidence in support of the counterclaim in accordance with the standard outlined in Brenner Associates, Inc. v. Rousseau, 537 A.2d 120, 123 (R.I.1988), and properly applied this standard to the evidence introduced by the defendants.

Consequently the defendants’ appeal is denied and dismissed. The judgment entered in the Superior Court is hereby affirmed.

FAY, C.J., did not participate.

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

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

This case came before the court for oral argument on September 28, 1993, pursuant to an order that had directed the defendants, Lenna W. Price and Francis Price Dwyer, to appear in order to show cause why the issues raised in this appeal should not be summarily decided.

After hearing the arguments of counsel and examining the memoranda filed by the parties, we are of the opinion that cause has not been shown.

The evidence submitted by the plaintiffs, William H. Sherman and Sandra L. Sherman, sustained their burden of proving that they had openly, notoriously, and adversely possessed the disputed nine-inch strip of land for a period in excess of the statutory period of ten years. See Locke v. O’Brien, 610 A.2d 562, 555 (R.I.1992). We also believe that the trial justice was legally correct in granting the plaintiffs’ motion for a directed verdict in respect to the counterclaim filed by the defendants. She analyzed the evidence in support of the counterclaim in accordance with the standard outlined in Brenner Associates, Inc. v. Rousseau, 537 A.2d 120, 123 (R.I.1988), and properly applied this standard to the evidence introduced by the defendants.

Consequently the defendants’ appeal is denied and dismissed. The judgment entered in the Superior Court is hereby affirmed.

FAY, C.J., did not participate.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

632 A.2d 643, 1993 R.I. LEXIS 227, 1993 WL 442435, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sherman-v-price-ri-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack