H 7213Cities & Towns

Towns and Cities - Actions by and Against Towns

This bill lowers the maximum payout for personal injury lawsuits against towns from $100,000 to $3,000 starting in 2026.

Held for study

Population
Affected

Email Legislator

Introduced Jan 21, 2026Committee House Judiciary

Plain-English Summary

This legislation significantly changes the rules for lawsuits filed against cities and towns regarding injuries sustained on streets or highways. First, it establishes that if a town repairs a defect after an injury occurs, that repair cannot be used in court as evidence that the town was negligent or that the street was defective. Second, and most notably, it drastically reduces the maximum amount of money a person can recover from a town for personal injuries. The current cap of $100,000 is lowered to $3,000 for any causes of action arising on or after January 1, 2026.

For younger readers

If you get hurt because a town street or sidewalk is broken, you are currently allowed to sue the town for help with your doctor bills. Right now, the most money you can get is $100,000. This new law changes that. Starting in the year 2026, if you get hurt, the most money the town would have to pay you is only $3,000, even if your injury is very bad. Also, if the town fixes the broken street after you get hurt, you cannot use that fix to prove they made a mistake.

Who & Where It Applies

Impacted groups

Accident victimsMunicipal governmentsTaxpayersPersonal injury attorneysPedestrians and drivers

Impacted communities

All

Constitutional & Fiscal Check

High risk

Significant Risk. The Rhode Island Constitution (Art. 1, Sec. 5) guarantees a "certain remedy" for injuries. While the legislature can set reasonable limits on suits against the state (sovereign immunity), reducing a cap from $100,000 to $3,000 for serious bodily injury may be viewed by the Judiciary as so low that it effectively bars a remedy entirely, rendering the right to sue illusory and violating Due Process.

Estimated cost

None

Estimated revenue

None

Bill Analysis

Both viewpoints

For Progressives

Protects municipal budgets from large legal settlements, potentially preserving funds for essential social services, schools, and community welfare programs that benefit the public.
Encourages towns to make necessary safety repairs immediately after an incident without the fear that fixing the problem will be used against them in court as an admission of guilt.
May prevent the diversion of taxpayer money into the hands of private litigation attorneys, ensuring public resources remain within the public sector.
Disproportionately harms low-income individuals who rely on litigation settlements to pay for medical bills and lost wages after an injury, as $3,000 is insufficient for serious injuries.
Removes financial accountability for cities and towns, effectively stripping citizens of their right to seek justice and fair compensation when the government is negligent.
Eliminates the financial incentive for municipalities to proactively maintain safe infrastructure, potentially leading to more dangerous conditions for pedestrians and cyclists.

For Conservatives

Significantly reduces the burden on taxpayers by limiting the government's financial liability in personal injury lawsuits, adhering to principles of fiscal conservatism.
Implements aggressive tort reform by preventing excessive payouts and limiting the ability of trial lawyers to extract large sums from the public purse.
Clarifies evidentiary rules to protect municipalities from liability based solely on their efforts to improve safety after an accident occurs.
Shields the government from accountability for its own negligence, violating the principle that the government should be held to the same standards of responsibility as private entities or individuals.
Infringes upon the individual rights of citizens to seek redress for grievances and damages to their person, a fundamental aspect of the rule of law.
Creates a perverse incentive for government inefficiency, as the cost of negligence ($3,000) becomes negligible compared to the cost of proper maintenance.

Votes

Loading votes...

Full Bill Text

Changes to existing Rhode Island law · 10 additions · 4 deletions

SECTION 1. Sections 45-15-11 and 45-15-12 of the General Laws in Chapter 45-15 entitled "Actions by and Against Towns" are hereby amended to read as follows: 45-15-11. Effect of mending of highway by town. No work done by any city or town, upon any way or street, in mending or repairing the way or street, shall constitute or be any evidence of an acceptance of the way or street by the city or town, nor shall it in any way change the status of the way or street; and the mending or repairing of the way or street, and any subsequent remedial measures taken that would have made an earlier injury or harm less likely to occur, shall in no way render the city or town liable to pay compensation or damages by reason of injuries suffered by any person or persons traveling upon the way or street, and evidence of the subsequent measures shall not be admissible to prove negligence, culpable conduct, a defect in the product or design, or a need for a warning or instruction. 45-15-12. Maximum recovery for personal injuries.

(a) No Notwithstanding §§ 9-31-2 and 9-31-3, no person shall recover from any town in any action mentioned in §§ 45-15-8 and 45-15-9, a greater sum for personal injuries than ~~one~~ ~~hundred thousand dollars ($100,000)~~ three thousand dollars ($3,000).

(b) This section shall be given retroactive effect and apply to all causes of action arising on or after ~~May 4, 1984~~ January 1, 2026.

SECTION 2. This act shall take effect upon passage.