R.I. Gen. Laws § 9-30-1

Section 9-30-1 gives the Superior Court power to declare rights and obligations under a contract, even when the parties have agreed to use a grievance procedure.

Cranston Teachers Ass'n v. Cranston School Committee · filed 1978-04-25

Here, G.L. 1956 (1969 Reenactment) §9-30-1 which confers upon the Superior Court the power to declare the rights and obligations arising under a contract, precludes an assertion that it lacked power to adjudicate the dispute.

Section 9-30-1 empowers the Superior Court to construe a statute and declare the parties’ rights and obligations under it.

P.J.C. Realty, Inc. v. Barry · filed 2002-12-27

However, under the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act, G.L.1956 §§ 9-30-1 through 9-30-16, the Superior Court “shah have power to declare rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed.” Section 9-30-1. Pursuant to this power, the trial justice had the authority to construe the obligation of the city to conform its ordinances with .the comprehensive plan as required by the Rhode Island Zoning Enabling Act.

Section 9-30-1 gives a court power to declare parties' rights and legal relations, including whether conduct violates a contract.

Chelo's of Woonsocket, Inc. v. Chelo, 03-4646 (r.I.super. 2004) · filed 2004-03-08

Under the Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act, this Court possesses "the power to declare rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed." R.I. Gen. Laws § 9-30-1 . ... Pursuant to its statutory powers, this Court grants Defendants' claim for declaratory judgment and declares the following as to Mozzarella's of North Providence as it is currently operating: J. Chelo's organization of, formation of, acquisition of and/or association with Mozzarella's is neither contrary to nor in violation of the terms and conditions of Paragraph 3 of the Agreement and Mozzarella's is not a full service, American-styled, casual theme restaurant business of the Chelo's Companies as that term is defined in Paragraph 3 of the Agreement.

Section 9-30-1 requires an actual, justiciable controversy before a court may grant declaratory relief.

Langton v. Demers · filed 1980-11-24

Therefore, no justiciable controversy existed and the trial justice did not abuse his discretion in denying the plaintiff’s request for relief pursuant to G.L. 1956 (1969 Reenactment) § 9-30-1, as amended by P.L. 1970, ch. 373, § 10.

Section 9-30-1 permits declaratory relief when the parties have an actual dispute over their legal rights and duties.

Pine v. Davis, 93-0995 (1999) · filed 1999-12-17

However, an actual controversy between the parties is a prerequisite to the granting of declaratory relief as the Court may not render advisory opinions or adjudicate hypothetical issues. ... This Court finds that a dispute exists concerning the legal rights and duties of the parties under the December 7th Order. In an effort to comply with the dictates of the December 7th Order, this Court believes that an actual controversy exists between the parties as to who is responsible for the continuation of the Site Stabilization Plan and where payment for its continuation is available or can be obtained.

Section 9-30-1 permits a court to declare rights and status when a justiciable controversy exists.

Delbonis Sand and Gravel Co. v. Town of Richmond, 1999-0356 (2004) · filed 2004-06-15

Under the Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act, this Court has "the power to declare rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed." R.I.G.L. § 9-30-1 . ... This Court initially finds that there exists a justiciable controversy — namely the application of the Town's merger provision to the DelBonis' lots.

Section 9-30-1 permits a court to declare legal rights when an actual controversy exists and a declaration will resolve the dispute.

R.I. Dept. of Ed. Loc. 2012 v. R.I. Bd. of Gov., H. Ed. 02-0761 (2003) · filed 2003-06-27

Under the Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act, this Court "shall have the power to declare rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed." G.L. 1956 § 9-30-1 . ... However, the necessary predicate to the exercise of that discretion under the Act is the existence of an actual justiciable controversy. ... As an initial matter, this Court notes that the requirement that there must be an actual controversy has been met. Plaintiff and the Board of Governors disagree as to whether or not the Board of Governors has adopted the ERS as a program. This Court will entertain Plaintiff's petition since a declaratory judgment in this matter will resolve the issue of whether or not the ERS is an option for employees of the Board of Governors.

Section 9-30-1 requires an actual or justiciable controversy before the Superior Court may declare rights; a dispute about whether a currently effective covenant will last indefinitely does not warrant a declaration now.

Solomon v. Zbr, 04-3107 (r.I.super. 2005) · filed 2005-05-25

The existence of an actual or justiciable controversy is a "necessary predicate" to a Court exercising jurisdiction under the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act. ... Thus, deciding whether the MRTA applies to this restrictive covenant or whether it is valid into perpetuity does not now settle a justiciable controversy.

Section 9-30-1 permits declaratory relief only when the plaintiff has standing and presents an actual justiciable controversy.

N M Prop. v. Town of West Warwick · filed 2007-04-19

Pursuant to the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act, the Superior Court is vested with the "power to declare rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed." Section 9-30-1 . ... Upon review of the record before the Court, this Court finds that Plaintiff has failed to establish the necessary requirement of standing. For that reason, Plaintiff has not presented this Court with a justiciable controversy.

Section 9-30-1 authorizes the Superior Court to declare legal rights, but declaratory relief requires an actual controversy rather than an abstract question or request for an advisory opinion.

Marketing v. Lynch · filed 2010-07-22

The UDJA vests the Superior Court with the "power to declare rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed." Section 9-30-1 . However, the Court does face certain jurisdictional constraints when considering a claim for declaratory relief. A declaratory-judgment action may not be used for the determination of abstract questions or the rendering of advisory opinions, nor does it license litigants to fish in judicial ponds for legal advice.

Section 9-30-1 empowers the Superior Court to declare legal rights even when administrative relief is available.

Pawtucket Teachers Alliance v. Sch. Comm., Pawtucket, 91-8034 (1992) · filed 1992-09-18

It is well settled, however, that even if it were possible for plaintiffs to obtain relief by administrative methods, the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act (§ 9-30-1 ) grants the Superior Court "power to declare rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed." Taylor v. Marshall, 119 R.I. 171 , 376 A.2d 712 (1972).

A third-party tort claimant cannot seek a declaration of an insurer’s duty to indemnify before obtaining judgment against the insured.

Baxendale v. Martin, 94-2303 (1997) · filed 1997-08-14

Because the plaintiff has not yet obtained judgment on the underlying tort claim, the plaintiff does not yet have a cognizable interest at stake under the insurance policies. Therefore, the plaintiff does not have standing to bring a declaratory judgment action against the defendant insurers.

Section 9-30-1 permits a court to declare rights affected by municipal regulations whether or not further relief is available.

Ide v. Charlestown Planning Commission, 01-0226 (2003) · filed 2003-02-14

Pursuant to the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act, this Court may "declare rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed." G.L. 1956 § 9-30-1 . Finding that Plaintiffs' rights are here affected by municipal regulations, this Court grants Plaintiffs' request for declaratory relief.

Section 9-30-1 permits an inmate to seek a declaration of his rights under the good-time statute after corrections officials decide to award the maximum credits allowed by law.

Gomes v. Wall · filed 2003-06-19

Rather, he sought to have the Superior Court declare what his legal rights were under the good-time statute, after defendants, in exercising their discretion, determined that he was entitled to receive the maximum amount of good-time credits possible under the law. Seeking such relief under the declaratory-judgment statute was appropriate, we hold, after defendants, in their discretion, decided that this particular inmate was entitled to receive the maximum monthly good-time credits allowed by law.

Section 9-30-1 requires a plaintiff seeking declaratory relief under an insurance policy to have standing; a person who is neither a party nor an intended beneficiary lacks it.

State v. Jua, 03-0743 (r.I.super. 2005) · filed 2005-06-07

The Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act vests the Court with "the power to declare rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed." G.L. 1956 § 9-30-1 . ... In this instance, the Court declines to grant declaratory judgment because Plaintiff has failed to establish that a justiciable controversy exists. The Plaintiff is not a party to the medical liability insurance policy executed by JUA and Dr. O'Brien, and so lacks standing to bring a declaratory judgment action.

Section 9-30-1 gives the Superior Court power to declare parties’ rights and legal relations, which it may exercise despite possible administrative remedies when referral would cause useless delay.

Lime Rock Fire District v. Iaff · filed 2007-01-26

Section 9-30-1 states the scope of the UDJA as follows: "The superior court or family court upon petition, following such procedure as the court by general or special rules may prescribe, shall have power to declare rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed. No action or proceeding shall be open to objection on the ground that a declaratory judgment or decree is prayed for. The declaration may be either affirmative or negative in form and effect; and such declarations shall have the force and effect of a final judgment or decree." ... Given the futility in dismissing this matter and the useless delay that would result, this Court exercises its power over Petitioner's request pursuant to the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act.

Section 9-30-1 permits a court to declare parties’ rights, status, and legal relations even when other relief is available, provided the plaintiff has standing.

A.F. Lusi Constr. v. Rhode Island Dept. · filed 2007-05-07

Under the UDJA, this Court has the power to "declare rights, status, and other legal relations" of the parties before the Court "whether or not further relief is or could be claimed." G.L. 1956 § 9-30-1 . ... Both statutes acknowledge that a person can challenge a regulation only if the person otherwise has standing to bring suit. ... Therefore, the Court finds that Lusi has alleged a sufficient injury in fact to confer standing.

Section 9-30-1 gives the Superior Court power to declare rights, status, and legal relations even when other relief is available.

Campbell v. Tiverton Zoning Board · filed 2007-08-28

Furthermore, the Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act, R.I. Gen. Laws § 9-30-1 et seq ., grants the Superior Court "power to declare rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not relief is or could be claimed." Section § 9-30-12 provides that the Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act should be "liberally construed and administered." This Court finds the Plaintiffs' request for such relief to be appropriate under the Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act.

Section 9-30-1 permits the Superior Court to declare statutory rights and legal relations even when an administrative remedy may also be available.

E Prov. School Com. v. E Prov. Edu. · filed 2010-03-15

However, even if the SLRB does have jurisdiction over ULP — 5951 and administrative relief is appropriate, the UDJA grants the Superior Court the power to declare the rights, status, and other legal relations of any party affected by a statute "whether or not further relief is or could be claimed." See §§ 9-30-1 — 2.

Section 9-30-1 allows courts to declare rights, status, and legal relations, but a declaratory-judgment action must present a justiciable claim, including a plaintiff with standing.

Lacera v. Department of Children, Youth, and Families · filed 2022-04-27

Declaratory-judgment proceedings are novel statutory proceedings that facilitate the termination of controversies and allow the trial court “to declare rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed.” N & M Properties, LLC, 964 A.2d at 1144 (quoting G.L. 1956 § 9-30-1); ... However, declaratory-judgment actions still require the trial justice to resolve issues of justiciability.

Section 9-30-1 permits the State to seek declaratory relief even though the Act’s definition of “persons” does not include the State.

Capital Properties, Inc. v. State, 88-1654 (1999) · filed 1999-07-13

However, R.I.G.L. § 9-30-1 does not limit declaratory relief to "persons" as defined by the Act.

Section 9-30-1 permits a court to decline declaratory relief when its decision on an administrative appeal has resolved the controversy.

Ramos v. R.I. Dept. of Human Services, 00-2374 (2001) · filed 2001-01-16

Whether or not to grant relief pursuant to G.L. 1956 § 42-35-7 according to which a party may seek a declaratory judgment under G.L. 1956 § 9-30-1 is within the discretion of the court. In this instance, this Court declines to render the requested declaration. Having affirmed the decision of the agency pursuant to G.L. 1956 § 42-35-15 , this Court has resolved the controversy and has no need to declare the rights of the parties.

Section 9-30-1 allows a court to decline declaratory relief when administrative review provides an adequate remedy and a declaration would duplicate that review.

Iselin v. Retirement Board of Employees System, 03-5162 (2004) · filed 2004-04-09

Exercising its discretion, this Court declines to entertain Iselin's request for declaratory relief. ... The Administrative Procedures Act provided Iselin with an adequate remedy for redress. Her question of law is resolved. Any declaratory relief provided by this Court would be duplicative of the administrative review process.

Section 9-30-1 empowers a court to declare rights, status, and legal relations even when further relief is available.

Park v. Rizzo Ford, Inc., 02-3910 (2004) · filed 2004-06-17

Under the Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act, this Court possesses "the power to declare rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed." G.L. 1956 § 9-30-1 . ... In the exercise of its discretion, this Court finds that a declaratory judgment as to the validity of the DOT Regulations is proper.

Section 9-30-1 gives the Superior Court discretion to decline declaratory relief when the issue belongs before arbitrators.

City of East Prov. v. R.I. State Assoc. · filed 2009-12-02

Pursuant to G.L. 1956 § 9-30-1 , Rhode Island's enactment of the Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act, the Superior Court has the "power to declare rights, status, and other legal relations" upon petition. Section 9-30-1 . The Court has considerable discretion as to whether to grant or deny a request for declaratory judgment. Town of Barrington v. Williams , 972 A.2d 603 , 608 (R.I. 2009). While the Court has the authority to issue declaratory judgments, it has no duty to do so. Cruz v. Wausau Ins. , 866 A.2d 1237 , 1240 (R.I. 2005). For the following reasons, the Court declines to issue a declaratory judgment here.

Section 9-30-1 allows the Superior Court to decline a declaration of rights when the evidence is insufficient to determine those rights.

Botelho v. City of Pawtucket School Dept. · filed 2010-04-12

The unavailability of the complete CBAs, the paucity of other evidence, and the fact that Retirees' breach of contract action leaves open an opportunity to develop the record further with regards to the meaning of the relevant CBAs all persuade the Court to wield its "power to declare rights, status, and other legal relations" with restraint. Section 9-30-1 . Thus, the Court declines to issue a declaratory judgment with regards to whether the Pawtucket School Committee promised to provide fully-paid health insurance benefits to Retirees or whether the School Department has violated the CBAs.

Section 9-30-1 gives the Superior Court power to declare legal rights and relations, but the court has discretion to decline declaratory relief.

Deutsche Bank v. City of Prov. · filed 2010-05-17

Pursuant to G.L. 1956 § 9-30-1 , Rhode Island's enactment of the Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act, the Superior Court has the "power to declare rights, status, and other legal relations" upon petition. ... While the Court has the authority to issue declaratory judgments, it has no duty to do so. ... For the following reasons, this Court declares that the portions of the Ordinances which prohibit the recording of certain deeds have been preempted by state law and cannot stand.

Section 9-30-1 gives the court discretion to decline declaratory relief when a matter is better suited to administrative proceedings.

Ri Brotherhood of Corrrectional v. State · filed 2011-04-18

Jurisdiction pursuant to § 9-30-1 is entirely discretionary, and this Court finds the instant matter is suited for the administrative hearing level at this juncture, in accordance with the longstanding exhaustion doctrine.

Section 9-30-1 gives the Superior Court discretion to grant or deny a declaration of rights, status, or legal relations, whether or not other relief is available.

Cigarrilha v. City of Providence · filed 2013-05-15

In an action for declaratory relief, a justice of the Superior Court has ―discretion to grant or deny declaratory relief under the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act * * *.‖ Town of Barrington v. Williams, 972 A.2d 603, 608 (R.I. 1999); see also G.L. 1956 § 9-30-1 (―The superior * * * court upon petition * * * shall have power to declare rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed.‖).

Section 9-30-1 gives the Superior Court broadly construed original jurisdiction to declare legal rights and relations.

Bradford Associates v. Rhode Island Division of Purchases · filed 2001-05-23

The act vests in the Superior Court the “power to declare rights, status, and other legal relations.” Section 9-30-1. This power is broadly construed, to allow the trial justice to “facilitate the termination of controversies.” ... An action pursuant to the act invokes the original, rather than appellate, jurisdiction of the Superior Court. ... Accordingly, we find that the Superior Court had subject-matter jurisdiction under the act.

Section 9-30-1 gives the Superior Court subject matter jurisdiction over a claim for declaratory judgment.

Liberty Mutual v. Ntl Council on Compens. · filed 2007-01-22

The Plaintiffs claim for a declaratory judgment also clearly invokes the subject matter jurisdiction of this Court under § 9-30-1 .

Section 9-30-1 empowers the Superior Court to declare the parties’ pension rights when they seek clarification and no administrative appeal process is available.

State v. Yashar · filed 2007-03-20

It is the view of this Court, therefore, that it not only has jurisdiction of the matters at hand, but that it has original and exclusive jurisdiction of this action. R.I. Gen. Laws § 9-30-1 (The Superior Court "shall have power to declare rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed."); R.I. Gen. Laws § 8-2-13 ("The superior court shall, except as otherwise provided by law, have exclusive original jurisdiction of suits and proceedings of an equitable character and of statutory proceedings following the course of equity.").

Section 9-30-1 gives the Superior Court jurisdiction to declare whether an allegedly nonconforming zoning use is legal.

Haronian v. Narragansett Zoning Bd. Review · filed 2007-08-03

Only the Superior Court, pursuant to G.L. 1956 § 9-30-1 , has the jurisdiction to make such declaratory judgments.

Section 9-30-1 does not give the Superior Court jurisdiction to review a town council’s quasi-judicial pension decision through a declaratory-judgment claim.

Sullivan v. Coventry Municipal Employees' Retirement Plan · filed 2019-03-22

We disagree with plaintiff’s characterization of his claims and with his assertion that the above- discussed statutes provide the Superior Court with subject-matter jurisdiction.

Declaratory relief generally requires exhaustion of administrative remedies, unless the complaint alleges that an ordinance is facially unconstitutional or that the agency or board lacked jurisdiction.

J. M. M. Jr. Enterprises, Inc. v. Cohen 00-405 (2002) · filed 2002-10-02

It is well-settled that a plaintiff seeking declaratory judgment must first exhaust all administrative remedies. However, even if the petitioner has not exhausted all administrative remedies, declaratory judgment is appropriate if the complaint alleges that an ordinance is facially unconstitutional or that the agency or board had no jurisdiction over the matter. Kingsley v. Miller, 120 R.I. 372 , 388 A.2d 357 (1978). The plaintiffs in the instant case have alleged neither.

Section 9-30-1 allows a declaratory challenge to a zoning ordinance’s facial validity under the Zoning Enabling Act without first applying for a special use permit.

South Co. Sand v. Town of South Kingstown · filed 2008-08-14

Thus, the Court finds that such a legal claim is properly before it, as South County is not required to apply for a special use permit before it may bring a declaratory judgment action seeking to invalidate the Amendments.

Section 9-30-1 gives the Superior Court power to declare rights and legal status, but a declaratory judgment counterclaim is not properly decided within an administrative appeal.

Parents of Cd v. McWalters, 04-0098 (r.I.super. 2005) · filed 2005-08-15

Barrington's request for declaratory judgment is controlled by the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act, G.L. §§ 9-30-1 to 9-30-16 , which grants the Superior Court "power to declare rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not relief is or could be claimed." Section 9-30-1 . ... This Court also dismisses Barrington's counterclaims for declaratory judgment and for unjust enrichment because they are not properly before this Court as counterclaims to an administrative appeal of the Commissioner's decision that the Petitioners are not residents of Barrington for school purposes.

Section 9-30-1 does not authorize a court to compel a municipality to enact a zoning amendment through declaratory relief.

Vaicaitis v. Town of Narragansett · filed 2008-11-10

Because this Court should not and may not employ its equitable or remedial powers to force a municipal legislature to enact a zoning amendment, and because it may not employ its powers of declaratory judgment "to compel the city to enact an ordinance any more than its equitable power or the remedy of mandamus could be utilized for that purpose," this Court declines to issue the requested declaratory judgment.

Section 9-30-1 permits affirmative or negative declarations but does not itself authorize injunctive relief.

Boyer v. Jeremiah · filed 2010-10-08

While the chapter specifically allows for a declaration in either affirmative or negative form, the section has consistently been interpreted to lack specific authorization for injunctive relief.

Section 9-30-1 gives the Family Court power to declare rights and legal relations, but that power does not authorize it to address the alleged systemic shortcomings of DCYF.

SAM M. EX REL. ELLIOTT v. Chafee · filed 2011-07-20

Pursuant to the Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act (“UDJA”), R.I. Gen. Laws § 9-30-1, ... the Family Court (or the superior court), “upon petition, following such procedure as the court by general or special rules may prescribe, shall have the power to declare rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed.” ... There is nothing to indicate, however, that, under its statutorily conveyed jurisdiction, the Family Court has the authority to address the shortcomings that the plaintiffs have specifically asserted against the DCYF, which, they allege, have led to violations of their constitutional rights, e.g., lack of licensed foster homes or other appropriate placements, shortage of case workers, unreasonable caseloads, and inadequate training.

Section 9-30-1 does not permit a party to pursue declaratory relief in Superior Court simultaneously with arbitration of the same dispute after electing the grievance process.

Peasley v. City of Providence, by and through its Treasurer, Shomari Husband · filed 2026-01-22

Peasley also references the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act (UDJA), G.L. 1956 § 9-30-1, which provides that the Superior Court “shall have [the] power to declare rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed.”3 (Emphasis added.) Based upon the emphasized statutory ... language, Peasley contends that he may simultaneously pursue an action for declaratory relief in the Superior Court and an arbitration proceeding. We disagree.