{"id":579,"date":"2014-02-04T12:59:04","date_gmt":"2014-02-04T12:59:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.apslaw.com\/on-appeal\/?p=579"},"modified":"2023-07-25T16:56:51","modified_gmt":"2023-07-25T20:56:51","slug":"3-sanctions-allowed-mere-failure-perfect-appeal","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.apslaw.com\/on-appeal\/untimely-appeal\/3-sanctions-allowed-mere-failure-perfect-appeal\/","title":{"rendered":"(3)   SANCTIONS NOT ALLOWED FOR MERE FAILURE TO PERFECT APPEAL."},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Although it is well settled that an appeal may be dismissed when it has not been perfected, the Rhode Island Supreme Court made clear this term that sanctions should not be imposed for mere failure to perfect an appeal.\u00a0 <i>See<\/i> <a href=\"http:\/\/www.courts.ri.gov\/Courts\/SupremeCourt\/Orders\/12-236.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Fiorenzano v. Lima, No. 2012-236-Appeal<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>In <i>Fiorenzano<\/i>, when the plaintiff failed to perfect his appeal, the trial justice granted the defendant\u2019s motion to dismiss plaintiff\u2019s appeal and, in addition, ordered that plaintiff pay defendant $1,500 as compensation for defendant\u2019s attorney obtaining dismissal of the appeal.\u00a0 <i>Id<\/i>. at 2.<\/p>\n<p>On appeal, the Supreme Court held that the imposition of a sanction for the plaintiff\u2019s failure to perfect his appeal was in error.\u00a0 <i>Id<\/i>. at 3.\u00a0 According to the Court, \u201c[n]o statute or rule calls for any further sanctions for the failure to perfect an appeal.\u201d\u00a0 <i>Id<\/i>.<b><\/b><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Although it is well settled that an appeal may be dismissed when it has not been perfected, the Rhode Island Supreme Court made clear this term that sanctions should not be imposed for mere failure to perfect an appeal.\u00a0 See Fiorenzano v&#8230;.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[76],"tags":[18,14,77],"class_list":["post-579","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-untimely-appeal","tag-appellate-practice","tag-rhode-island-supreme-court","tag-untimely-appeals"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.apslaw.com\/on-appeal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/579","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.apslaw.com\/on-appeal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.apslaw.com\/on-appeal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.apslaw.com\/on-appeal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.apslaw.com\/on-appeal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=579"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.apslaw.com\/on-appeal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/579\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.apslaw.com\/on-appeal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=579"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.apslaw.com\/on-appeal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=579"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.apslaw.com\/on-appeal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=579"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}