Tri-Town Construction Company, Inc.
Commerce Park Associates 12, LLC et al.
County Superior Court (KC 15-972) Associate Justice Allen P.
Plaintiff: Vincent A. Indeglia, Esq. Ryan J. Lutrario, Esq.
Defendants: Richard G. Riendeau, Esq.
Present: Suttell, C.J., Goldberg, Flaherty, and Robinson, JJ.
WILLIAM P. ROBINSON, III ASSOCIATE JUSTICE
outset, we note that the parties in the instant case were
previously before this Court in Tri-Town Construction
Company, Inc. v. Commerce Park Associates 12, LLC, 139
A.3d 467 (R.I. 2016) (Tri-Town I). In our first
chapter of Tri-Town, we affirmed a judgment of the
Superior Court in favor of the plaintiff, Tri-Town
Construction Company, Inc. (Tri-Town or the Judgment
Creditor), against the defendants, Commerce Park Associates
12, LLC and Nicholas E. Cambio (the Judgment Debtors), in the
amount of $3, 911, 894.95 (plus post-judgment interest) on
claims for breach of a promissory note and breach of a
guaranty of that note. Id. at 473.
us today, in the second chapter of Tri-Town, solely
Mr. Cambio appeals from a particular order of the Superior
Court, which reads in pertinent part as follows:
"Tri-Town Construction Company, Inc. shall be the
effective assignee and step in the shoes of the Judgment
Debtor[, ] [Mr. Cambio, ] and litigate any and all claims of
the Judgment Debtor arising out of the Choses in Action, up
to the amounts necessary to satisfy Judgment in this action
in the amount of $3, 911, 894.95, plus attorney's fees
totaling $43, 227.25 through October 16, 2014, and
post-judgment interest to accrue pursuant to the contractual
rate of 7% per annum."
appellate papers, Mr. Cambio contends the following: (1)
"[t]he order substituting Tri-Town for Cambio as the
party to litigate Cambio's claims is immediately
appealable;" (2) "[t]he Superior Court exceeded its
authority [under G.L. 1956 § 9-28-1 when it ordered
that Tri-Town * * * step in the shoes of the Judgment Debtor
and litigate any and all claims, " "in light of
Tri-Town's pleadings which failed to put Cambio on notice
that it would be substituted as the claimant in the
receivership proceedings;" and (3) "[t]he
substitution of an adversary to litigate the interests of its
opponent violates the fundamental principles behind the Rules
of Professional Conduct." As might be expected, Tri-Town
argues that "[i]t is clear from the language" of
§ 9-28-1 that "[t]he Superior Court * * * properly
exercised its authority in issuing the attachment
case came before the Supreme Court for oral argument pursuant
to an order directing the parties to appear and show cause
why the issues raised in this appeal should not be summarily
decided. After a close review of the record and careful
consideration of the parties' arguments (both written and
oral), we are satisfied that cause has not been shown and
that this appeal may be decided at this time. And, relying
solely on the ground that the issue raised on appeal is not
properly before us due to our raise-or-waive rule, we affirm
the order of the Superior Court.
October 9, 2015, Tri-Town filed a "Creditor's
Equitable Action" pursuant to § 9-28-1, seeking a
judgment that authorized attachment of the Judgment
Debtors' "Estate, including but not limited to all
bank accounts, automobiles, fixed assets and tangible assets,
real estate holdings * * *, choses in action, and all other
assets of the Judgment Debtor forthwith" as well as
"any other further just relief as this [c]ourt deems
proper." Then, approximately five days later, Tri-Town
filed a motion entitled, "Motion to Attach the Chose in
Action of the Judgment Debtors." In that motion,
Tri-Town requested the following relief:
"1. Granting the Judgment Creditor's Motion to
Attach the Chose in Action of the Judgment Debtors; 2.
Authorize the Judgment Creditor to reach and apply and
subject to the payment as satisfaction of its Judgment any
choses in action of the Judgment Debtors; 3. Declare that the
Judgment Creditor shall reach and apply and subject to the
payment as satisfaction of its Judgment the chose in action
of the Judgment Debtors entitled Nicholas E. Cambio, Trustee,
and Nicholas E. Cambio, Roonie A. Malafronte and Vincent A.
Cambio Trust v. Commerce Park Realty, LLC, et al., C.A. No.:
PM-13-0350, consolidated with Matthew J. McGowan, as and only
as Receiver for Commerce Park Realty, LLC, et al. v. Commerce
Park Management, LLC, C.A. No.: PB-2013-5001 [(hereinafter
referred to as "the receivership cases")], whereby
any and all disbursements to the Judgment Debtors arising out
of such chose in action shall be attached by and distributed
to the Judgment Creditor; and 4. Any and all other just
relief that this [c]ourt deems is appropriate."
record reflects that, on October 14, 2015, Mr. Cambio was
served with both of the above-referenced documents, in
addition to a summons, at his dwelling house or usual place
of abode, said service being made upon a person of suitable
age and discretion then residing therein-viz., the
wife of Mr. Cambio, Regina Cambio. On that same date,
Commerce Park Associates 12, LLC (CPA 12) was served with ...