Rule 25. Substitution of Parties

(a) Death.

(1) If a party dies and the claim is not thereby extinguished, the court may order substitution of the proper parties. The motion for substitution may be made by any party or by the successors or representatives of the deceased party and, together with the notice of hearing, shall be served on the parties as provided by Rule 5 and upon persons not parties in the manner provided in Rule 4 for the service of a summons. If no motion for substitution is made the action shall be subject to dismissal under Rule 41(b).

(2) In the event of the death of one (1) or more of the plaintiffs or of one (1) or more of the defendants in an action in which the right sought to be enforced survives only to the surviving plaintiffs or only against the surviving defendants, the action does not abate. The death shall be suggested on the record and the action shall proceed in favor of or against the surviving parties.

(b) Incompetency. If a party becomes incompetent, the court upon motion served as provided in subdivision (a) of this rule may allow the action to be continued by or against the party's representative.

(c) Transfer of Interest. In case of any transfer of interest, the action may be continued by or against the original party, unless the court upon motion directs the person to whom the interest is transferred to be substituted in the action or joined with the original party. Service of the motion shall be made as provided in subdivision (a) of this rule.

(d) Public Officers; Death or Separation From Office.

(1) When a public officer is a party to an action in an official capacity and during its pendency dies, resigns, or otherwise ceases to hold office, the action does not abate and the public officer's successor is automatically substituted as a party. Proceedings following the substitution shall be in the name of the substituted party, but any misnomer not affecting the substantial rights of the parties shall be disregarded. An order of substitution may be entered at any time, but the omission to enter such an order shall not affect the substitution.

(2) When a public officer sues or is sued in an official capacity, the public officer may be described as a party by the officer's official title rather than by name; but the court may require the public officer's name to be added. Introductory Notes on 1995 Amendments of the Discovery Rules At the time the Rhode Island Superior Court Rules of Civil Procedure were adopted in 1966, the discovery rules, Rules 26-37, were patterned generally upon the corresponding Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Departures from the federal model were based in part upon proposed changes to the federal discovery rules which had not yet been adopted. Rules 26-37 of the Superior Court Rules of Civil Procedure have not been amended significantly since 1966. In 1970 Rules 26-37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure were amended extensively. Those 1970 amendments made substantial changes in the federal discovery rules, some of them along lines already adopted in Rhode Island. Further, the 1970 amendments restructured the federal discovery rules. The present amendments to the Superior Court civil rules are designed to accomplish two purposes. First, the structure of the discovery rules is brought into conformity with the corresponding federal rules. Second, the committee has examined each rule specifically, proposing adoption of some of the federal changes, proposing retention of some of the Rhode Island variations, and proposing some new modifications based on the committee's perception of the needs of the Superior Court in light of its experience with the rules. Explanation of specific rule changes recommended are found in the Committee Note following each rule amended. Explanation of the 1970 amendments to the Federal Rules relating to discovery are detailed by the Advisory Committee in 48 Federal Rules Decisions, beginning at page 487. Failure to rearrange the rules would perpetuate confusion resulting from the differences in numbering between the Federal and Rhode Island rules, a difference which has existed since 1970. Below is a table indicating where the transferred provisions have been placed. Table Showing Rearrangement of Rules Existing Rule No. Proposed Rule No. 26(a) 30(a) 26(c) 30(c) 26(d) 32(a) 26(e) 32(b) 26(f) 32(c) 30(a) 30(b), 26(d) 30(b) 26(c) 31(d) 26(c) 32(a) 32(e)(1) 32(b) 32(e)(2) 32(c) 32(e)(3)