- 1 -

Supreme Court

No. 2023-239-Appeal.

(WC 19-1004)

Kristina Ransom :

v. :

Patrick Greichen. :

O R D E R

This case came before the Supreme Court on April 9, 2024, 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 considering the parties’ written and 

oral submissions and reviewing the record, we are satisfied that cause has not been 

shown and that the appeal may be decided at this time without further briefing or 

argument. The defendant, Patrick Greichen, appeals from a June 4, 2023 order of 

the Family Court directing Mr. Greichen to continue with weekly, supervised 

visitation through the Family Court visitation program unless he and the plaintiff, 

Kristina Ransom, could mutually agree upon an alternative method of supervision.1

 

Mr. Greichen argued that the hearing justice erred in ordering six months of 

1 The June 4, 2023 order was entered following a hearing on May 22, 2023. 
- 2 - 

supervised visitation without looking at the reports for the first six months of 

supervised visits.2

 

Only final orders of the Family Court are reviewable by this Court on appeal. 

General Laws 1956 § 14-1-52(a). Interlocutory orders, and orders relating to the 

modification of alimony or child support, are solely reviewable by way of writ of 

certiorari. Dale v. Dale, 37 A.3d 124, 124 (R.I. 2012) (mem.); § 14-1-52(b). The 

Family Court has the authority to modify the visitation rights of a parent. Seravo v. 

Seravo, 525 A.2d 922, 924 (R.I. 1987). After final judgment in a divorce action, 

modification may be sought by serving a summons, complaint, and all other required 

documents upon the party against whom relief is sought. R. Dom. Rel. P. 64A(a). 

However, Mr. Greichen did not appeal from the Family Court’s denial of his postfinal-judgment motion to modify visitation. Instead, he appealed from the order that 

maintained the weekly supervised visitation that was already in place and continued 

the matter for control to November 2023. Therefore, the order was provisional, 

merely deciding an intermediate matter, rather than disposing of the whole matter. 

2 Mr. Greichen also makes a number of arguments relative to the Family Court’s 

suspension of his visitation schedule back in June 2022, as well as a related domestic 

abuse complaint that Ms. Ransom had filed against him. None of these issues are 

properly before the Court. Mr. Greichen did not appeal the domestic abuse 

complaint or the Family Court’s order suspending his visitation schedule. See Sentas 

v. Sentas, 911 A.2d 266, 269 n.3 (R.I. 2006) (“We will not consider ‘an issue on 

appeal for which a notice of appeal never was filed.’”) (quoting State v. Hallenbeck, 

878 A.2d 992, 1020 (R.I. 2005)).
- 3 - 

See Simpson v. Vose, 702 A.2d 1176, 1177 (R.I. 1997) (mem.). Thus, to seek review 

of the June 4, 2023 order, the appropriate avenue was to file a petition for writ of 

certiorari. Dale, 37 A.3d at 124. The appeal is denied and dismissed, and the papers 

may be returned to the Family Court. 

Entered as an Order of this Court this day of May, 2024

 By Order, 

 

 Clerk 
SU-CMS-02B (revised November 2022)

STATE OF RHODE ISLAND

SUPREME COURT – CLERK’S OFFICE

Licht Judicial Complex

250 Benefit Street

Providence, RI 02903

ORDER COVER SHEET

Title of Case Kristina Ransom v. Patrick Greichen.

Case Number No. 2023-239-Appeal.

(WC 19-1004)

Date Order Filed May 3, 2024

Justices Suttell, C.J., Goldberg, Robinson, Lynch Prata, and 

Long, JJ.

Source of Appeal Washington County Family Court 

Judicial Officer from Lower Court Associate Justice Laureen A. D’Ambra

Attorney(s) on Appeal

For Plaintiff:

Kristina Ransom, pro se 

For Defendant: 

Patrick Greichen, pro se