Cigarrilha v. City of Providence

64 A.3d 1208 (2013)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Cigarrilha v. City of Providence

Rhode Island Supreme Court
64 A.3d 1208 (2013)

  • Written by Tanya Munson, JD

Facts

Cecilia and Manuel Cigarrilha (plaintiffs) owned a three-family rental unit on property in Providence, Rhode Island. The unit on the property was constructed in 1911, and in 1923 the City of Providence (defendant) adopted its first zoning ordinance. The ordinance designated the area where the Cigarrilhas’ property was located as a low-density residential zone and only permitted single-family or two-family dwellings. According to the ordinance, any uses established before the ordinance’s 1923 enactment were deemed to be grandfathered in. In 2008, the Cigarrilhas requested permits from the city to restore electrical meters at the property. The city conducted an inspection of the property before issuing the permits and determined that the unit on the property was being used as a three-family dwelling in violation of the city’s zoning ordinance. The Cigarrilhas filed a complaint and motion for a temporary restraining order in superior court. The Cigarrilhas sought to enjoin the city from enforcing the ordinance codes. The Cigarrilhas also filed an appeal of the city’s determination that their property was an illegal three-family dwelling with the city’s zoning board of appeals. The zoning board affirmed the city’s determination. The Cigarrilhas amended their superior-court complaint to appeal the zoning board’s decision and to seek a declaration that their property was a legal nonconforming use. The trial judge found that the Cigarrilhas did not prove that their property was used as a three-family dwelling before the 1923 zoning ordinance and declined to declare the property constituted a legal nonconforming use. The Cigarrilhas appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Robinson, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 806,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership