{"id":694,"date":"2014-08-26T23:22:39","date_gmt":"2014-08-26T23:22:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.apslaw.com\/on-appeal\/?p=694"},"modified":"2023-07-25T10:49:20","modified_gmt":"2023-07-25T14:49:20","slug":"5-know-5","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.apslaw.com\/on-appeal\/interlocutory-appeals\/5-know-5\/","title":{"rendered":"(5)  DID YOU KNOW?"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The Rhode Island Supreme Court often will raise issues related to the permissibility of an appeal during the required prebriefing conference?\u00a0 <em>See<\/em> <a href=\"http:\/\/www.courts.ri.gov\/Courts\/SupremeCourt\/Opinions\/13-197.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Coit v. Tillinghast, No. 2013-197-Appeal<\/a> at 8 (Court raised issue concerning the interlocutory nature of the appeal during the prebriefing conference and directed the parties to file supplemental memoranda addressing whether the order from which the appeal was taken was interlocutory).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The Rhode Island Supreme Court often will raise issues related to the permissibility of an appeal during the required prebriefing conference?\u00a0 See Coit v. Tillinghast, No. 2013-197-Appeal at 8 (Court raised issue concerning the interlocutory nature of the appeal during the prebriefing&#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":[92],"tags":[18,13,14],"class_list":["post-694","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-interlocutory-appeals","tag-appellate-practice","tag-interlocutory-appeals","tag-rhode-island-supreme-court"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.apslaw.com\/on-appeal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/694","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=694"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.apslaw.com\/on-appeal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/694\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.apslaw.com\/on-appeal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=694"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.apslaw.com\/on-appeal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=694"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.apslaw.com\/on-appeal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=694"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}