Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Leblanc v. Tuckertown Village Association, 95-0009 (1997) (1997)

Citation
Leblanc v. Tuckertown Village Association, 95-0009 (1997) (1997)
Parent Document
Leblanc v. Tuckertown Village Association, 95-0009 (1997) (1997)
Jurisdiction
Rhode Island (state)
Effective Date
1997-10-08

Other Sections in This Document (43)

Full Text

779 chars
The first element of collateral estoppel is the identity of the issues. Justice Famigletti's decision in Baker clearly delineates the former issue: ". . . what the plaintiffs do dispute . . . is the legality of having differing methods of rent increases for residents of similar class."9 Baker, WC92-0326, Decision, at p. 10. In their appeal of the hearing officer's decision, the Court analyzed and addressed the methodology of the rent structure pursuant to G.L. § 31-44-3 (3) and the creation of different "classes" to support a non-uniform rent increase. (Emphasis added). Id. at 6-7. Additionally, the Court suggested alternative methods to recapture various expenses without "setting different methods for increasing rents for residents who are similar in class." Id. at 8.