Opinion ID: 2404170
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: The Public Trust Doctrine as a Doctrine of State Law

Text: The laws of our sister states are not always helpful to a determination of the law of the State of Rhode Island regarding the public-trust doctrine because each state has applied it in ways peculiar to that state. As noted in Shively: The foregoing summary of the laws of the original States shows that there is no universal and uniform law upon the subject; but that each State has dealt with the lands under the tide waters within its borders according to its own views of justice and policy, reserving its own control over such lands, or granting rights therein to individuals or corporations, whether owners of the adjoining upland or not, as it considered for the best interests of the public. Great caution, therefore, is necessary in applying precedents in one State to cases arising in another. 152 U.S. at 26, 14 S.Ct. at 557, 38 L.Ed. at 341. Accordingly, this inquiry will focus on the laws of Rhode Island and will include the customs and usages relating to the public-trust doctrine from our early colonial history to the present, and we shall refer to other state and federal decisions where helpful. Rhode Island decisional law and this court have never cast aside the public-trust doctrine. As a matter of fact, this court has consistently cited federal decisions that embrace this well-articulated body of general law. See Hall v. Nascimento, 594 A.2d 874, 877 (R.I. 1991) (citing Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Mississippi, 484 U.S. 469, 473, 108 S.Ct. 791, 794, 98 L.Ed.2d 877, 884 (1988) (recounting the pervasiveness of the public-trust doctrine in American jurisprudence), ( Shively, 152 U.S. at 57, 14 S.Ct. at 569, 38 L.Ed. at 352) (same), and ( Illinois Central R.R. v. Illinois, 146 U.S. 387, 13 S.Ct. 110, 36 L.Ed. 1018 (1892) (firmly established that title to lands below the high-water mark vests in the several states as trustees for the public)); State v. Ibbison, 448 A.2d 728, 731 (R.I. 1982) (citing Martin v. Waddell, 41 U.S. (16 Pet.) 367, 10 L.Ed. 997 (1842) (embracing the developing body of general law known as the public-trust doctrine)); Comstock, 27 R.I. at 542-43, 547, 65 A. at 308 (citing Shively and Illinois Central ); Providence Steam-Engine Co. v. Providence & Stonington Steamship Co., 12 R.I. 348, 360 (1879) (Potter, J., concurring) (citing Martin v. Waddell ).