[3] After reviewing the memoranda submitted by the parties and after hearing the arguments of counsel, we are of the opinion that cause has not been shown, and the issues will be summarily decided at this time.
[4] The plaintiff, in an amended complaint, asserted that defendant Town Council violated the Charter of Charlestown in respect to its provisions regarding open meetings and the notice requirements thereof, and the procedures delineated in the Charter for approving unbudgeted expenditures. This court concludes that defendants' motion to dismiss pursuant to Super.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) was appropriately granted by the trial justice, who determined that plaintiff did not have standing to bring suit to challenge such expenditures.
[5] In Ianero v. Town of Johnston, 477 A.2d 619 (R.I. 1984), this court held that, in the specific context of a taxpayer's standing, "it is well settled in this jurisdiction that where a taxpayer brings an action to restrain government *Page 1227 action, he or she must demonstrate an injury that is distinct from that of the public in general." Id. at 621.
[6] Consequently, we hold that the trial justice properly determined that the plaintiff lacked standing to bring the instant suit because the plaintiff alleged no specific personal injury as a result of the defendants' actions. In addition, moneys advanced by the Town were subsequently returned, thus rendering moot the issue of improper appropriation of funds. Therefore, we deny and dismiss the appeal and return the papers in the case to the Superior Court.