Louis Paolino v. Joseph Ferreira
153 A.3d 505
| R.I. | 2017Background
- Dispute over contamination and encroachments between adjoining Cumberland properties: Ferreira’s former auto-salvage yard (later owned/leased by entities including J.F. Realty and LKQ) and Paolino’s six-acre lot bordering a stream and ponds.
- Trial (jury) found a continuing trespass (building corner, headwall/riprap, and stormwater discharge) and awarded nominal damages to Paolino; plaintiffs sought injunctive relief and broader remediation damages.
- Plaintiffs’ environmental expert (Alvin Snyder) reviewed voluminous reports, performed site visits and sampling, and opined the salvage yard/stormwater discharges caused oil contamination along the stream/ditch on Paolino’s property.
- The trial justice excluded portions of Snyder’s causation testimony for lack of foundation (while allowing limited opinion that the headwall discharge caused oil onto Paolino’s property) and denied injunctive relief for most encroachments after balancing equities; she ordered removal of the metal building encroachment.
- Plaintiffs appealed; the Supreme Court held the exclusion of Snyder’s expert testimony was an abuse of discretion and remanded for a new trial on all issues except injunctive relief. The Court also vacated Rule 11 sanctions imposed on Attorney Brian Wagner for mischaracterizing the jury verdict.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether injunctive relief must be granted for continuing trespass | Paolino: continuing trespass requires injunction to remove encroachments and discharge | Ferreira: encroachments de minimis; defendants acted in good faith; removal would be disproportionate harm | Court affirmed in part: injunction granted only for building; trial justice did not abuse discretion in balancing equities for other encroachments |
| Admissibility of expert causation testimony (Snyder) | Snyder had adequate foundation (documents, sampling, site visits) to opine stormwater runoff caused oil contamination | Defendants: insufficient scientific foundation/baseline to link Ferreira property discharges to contamination on Paolino’s land | Court held trial justice abused discretion by overly restricting Snyder; causation testimony should have been admitted and weight left to jury; new trial required (except injunctive-relief issue) |
| Motion to amend pleadings to conform to evidence (punitive damages vs. J.F. Realty) | Plaintiffs sought leave to conform pleadings to evidence at trial | Defendants opposed | Not decided on merits by Supreme Court (mooted by remand); reserved for retrial/remand |
| Rule 11 sanctions against Attorney Wagner for mischaracterizing jury verdict | Wagner: his reading of jury interrogatories was reasonable and made in good faith; attached verdict sheet to other filings | Defendants: Wagner misrepresented jury findings and submitted motion for improper purpose | Court vacated sanctions: jury answers susceptible to reasonable interpretation; imposition was an abuse of discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Santilli v. Morelli, 230 A.2d 860 (R.I. 1967) (general rule that continuing trespass normally warrants injunctive relief)
- Renaissance Dev. Corp. v. Universal Props. Group, Inc., 821 A.2d 233 (R.I. 2003) (balancing equities inappropriate where encroachment was knowing and deliberate)
- Rose Nulman Park Foundation v. Four Twenty Corp., 93 A.3d 25 (R.I. 2014) (equitable remedies and balancing of hardships for land encroachments)
- Gallucci v. Humbyrd, 709 A.2d 1059 (R.I. 1998) (trial justice abused discretion by applying overly rigid admissibility standard and effectively disqualifying expert)
- Owens v. Silvia, 838 A.2d 881 (R.I. 2003) (expert testimony admissible if reached by methodologically reliable means; weight is for the jury)