Rhode Island

Summary: This Rhode Island Supreme Court case centers on a disagreement among former spouses concerning the ex-husband's visitation with their two dogs acquired during marriage. Before the Court is an order directing the parties to appear and show cause why the issues raised in this appeal should not be summarily decided. After review, the Court concluded that cause was not shown and affirmed the order of the Family Court. The couple entered into a Marital Settlement Agreement (MSA) formalizing the terms of the dissolution of Diane and Paul Giarrusso's marriage and giving Diane all title and interest to the dogs and Paul twice a week visitation. The weekly visitation proceeded according to the agreement for over a year, when Diane ceased allowing Paul's visits. Paul then filed a motion for post-final judgment relief citing breach of the agreement and Diane counterclaimed. A justice of the Family Court held a hearing on the issue, where each party testified and submitted associated texts and emails. In one recounted incident, a dog was missing for some time at Paul's house. Ultimately, the dog was found to be accidentally locked in a closet. At the conclusion of the hearing, Diane argued that the justice should withdraw approval for the MSA because Paul failed to care for the dogs and showed bad faith, while Paul argued that Diane had breached the terms. The hearing justice affirmed the visitation schedule of the MSA, denied Diane's requested relief, and awarded attorney fees to Paul. On appeal here, Diane argues that the hearing justice was "clearly wrong and overlooked material evidence when she found that Paul had acted in good faith." In particular, Diane contends that the dogs are chattel and Paul failed to provide safe conditions and return them to her in an undamaged condition. The Supreme Court held, in noting that the MSA retains the characteristics of a contract, that it would not overturn the hearing justice's determination in absence of mutual mistake in the contract (the MSA). There was no mutual mistake in the MSA's visitation provision and no basis for the hearing justice to conclude that the MSA needs to be reformed. Further, this court found no evidence of bad faith on Paul's part and that the hearing justice's findings were support by the evidence. Thus, it was not inequitable to enforce the visitation term in the MSA as written. The order of the Family Court was affirmed and the matter returned to Family Court.

Summary: This chapter, adopted in 2018, is the “Research Animal Retirement Act." A higher education research facility that receives public money must assess the health of a cat or dog to determine whether it is suitable for adoption once any testing or research on the animal has been completed. The facility must then make reasonable efforts to place those suitable dogs or cats through private adoption or adoption through a shelter or rescue. These efforts shall be made prior to euthanizing the dog or cat.

Summary: This Rhode Island law provides that parents or legal guardians of any student in a public or nonpublic primary or secondary school may refuse to allow their child to dissect or vivisect any vertebrate or invertebrate animal, or any part of a vertebrate or invertebrate animal. Students who refuse shall not be discriminated against for not participating in dissection and shall be offered an alternative method of learning the material.

Summary: This act is known as the “Research Animal Retirement Act.” Under the law, a higher education research facility that receives public money or a facility that provides research in collaboration with a higher education facility shall, after the completion of any testing or research involving a dog or cat, assess the health of the dog or cat and determine whether it is suitable for adoption. The facility must then make reasonable efforts to offer those dogs or cats for adoption through: private placement or through an animal rescue and shelter organization; a duly incorporated society for the prevention of cruelty to animals; a duly incorporated humane society; or a duly incorporated animal protective association that operates physical animal sheltering facilities and offers household pets to the public for adoption by way of an established adoption program. These efforts shall be made prior to euthanizing the dog or cat.

Summary: This Rhode Island law, effective in 2017, prohibits the possession, sale, offering for sale, trading, or distribution of shark fin. “Shark fin” means the raw, dried, or otherwise processed detached fin or the raw, dried, or otherwise processed detached tail of a shark. Even if a person holds a license to take sharks, he or she must immediately destroy any shark fin separated from the shark unless used by the person for the purposes of taxidermy and subsequent display. Violation incurs a fine or not less than $500 nor more than $1,000 imprisonment of up to 90 days, or both.

Summary: This Rhode Island law, enacted in 2016, states that a restaurant with an outdoor dining area may allow a patron's dog to accompany the patron in the outdoor dining area during the hours designated by the owner of the restaurant. The owner may establish limits on the size and types of dogs in addition to other restrictions. The patron visiting the restaurant must not allow the dog to travel through the indoor space of the restaurant and must keep the dog leashed and supervised at all times. There must be an adult responsible for the behavior of the dog and that person is liable for any damages to the restaurant or other patrons.

Summary: This Rhode Island law makes it unlawful for any person to transport any animal, whether for business or pleasure, in an open air motor vehicle unless certain requirements are met: (1) the animal is kept in an enclosed area of the vehicle; (2) the animal is under physical control of a person; or (3) the animal is safely restrained and harnessed by means other than a neck restraint. Violation results in a fine of $50 to $100, with an increase of up to $200 for each subsequent offense.

Summary: The State of Rhode Island Emergency Management Agency is tasked with the coordination of emergency response and plans. Emergency Support Function 11, "Provides the coordination of local resources in response to pet, farm, and wild animal care needs before, during, and following a significant natural disaster or man-made event. Responsible for the protection and recovery of natural and cultural resources and historic properties. Identifies, obtains, and transports food and water supplies to impacted areas in the aftermath of a disaster or emergency" according to that agency.

Summary: This law provides that the Department of Environmental Management shall not promulgate or enforce any rule or regulation that would prohibit a pet dog or cat from accompanying its owner or caretaker at any state owned campground.

Summary: This statute prohibits internet hunting of any bird or animal within the state of Rhode Island. Violations of this section is a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars ($500) or imprisonment for up to ninety (90) days, or both.