Capital Video Corporation v. Joseph A. Bevilacqua
Syllabus
The plaintiff, Capital Video Corporation (plaintiff), appealed from a Superior Court order in favor of the intervenor, Donna Bevilacqua, (1) invalidating two pluries executions on a judgment entered in 2002 against the defendant, Joseph A. Bevilacqua, and (2) requiring the plaintiff to release and discharge those pluries executions. Before this Court, the plaintiff argued that the trial justice erred in "[d]iverging" from the language of G.L. 1956 § 9-25-19 and "[i]nvalidating the [e]xecutions under § 9-25-3's six-year limitations period." The Supreme Court affirmed the trial justice's decision invalidating the pluries executions, but on grounds other than those relied upon by the trial justice. The Supreme Court determined that §§ 9-25-3 and 9-25-19 do not conflict and that, in harmonizing the statutes to effectuate the legislature's intent, replacement executions pursuant to § 9-25-19 are subject to the time limitations set forth in § 9 25-3. Applying the foregoing interpretation to the facts of the plaintiff's appeal, the Supreme Court concluded that the plaintiff failed to seek the 2020 and 2022 pluries executions within the prescribed time limitations in § 9-25-3, and that the plaintiff additionally failed to satisfy certain procedural requirements for seeking a replacement execution under § 9-25-19. Accordingly, the Supreme Court affirmed the order of the Superior Court.
Opinion Excerpt
Issued: July 22, 2025 Corrected: July 28, 2025 Supreme Court No. 2023-244-Appeal. (PC 97-4715) Capital Video Corporation : v. : Joseph A. Bevilacqua. : NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Rhode Island Reporter. Readers