Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Citation
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Parent Document
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Jurisdiction
- Rhode Island (state)
- Effective Date
- 2004-12-09
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2401900/powers-v-coccia/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (37)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
- Powers v. Coccia, 861 A.2d 466 (2004)
Full Text
346 charsWe conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it excluded, as hearsay, the defendant’s affidavit and its attachments, and we therefore uphold the Superior Court’s denial of the plaintiffs’ motion for a new trial. For the foregoing reasons, we deny the plaintiffs’ appeal, and the judgment of the Superior Court is affirmed. 1