Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
15 North Dakota opinions name it 1 courts 1990–2008 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by North Dakota courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
In Interest of JSgreen2 sentences2005See Interest of J.S. , 499 N.W.2d 604, 606 (N.D. 1993) (discussing the State Hospital’s burden); N.D.C.C. § 25-03.1-19. 2005See Interest of J.S., 499 N.W.2d 604, 606 (N.D.1993) (discussing the State Hospital’s burden); N.D.C.C. § 25-03.1-19. | 3 | 3 |
In Interest of NWgreen2 sentences1996Compare In Interest of N.W., 531 N.W.2d 303, 307 (N.D.1995) (when hearing to extend foster care not held timely, dismissal serves no practical purpose except to delay stability in lives of children); Anderson v. H.M., 317 N.W.2d 394, 402 (N.D.1982) (similar). 1996Compare In Interest of N.W., 531 N.W.2d 303, 307 (N.D.1995) (when hearing to extend foster care not held timely, dismissal serves no practical purpose except to delay stability in lives of children); Anderson v. H.M., 317 N.W.2d 394, 402 (N.D.1982) (similar). | 2 | 2 |
Anderson v. H. M.green2 sentences1996Compare In Interest of N.W., 531 N.W.2d 303, 307 (N.D.1995) (when hearing to extend foster care not held timely, dismissal serves no practical purpose except to delay stability in lives of children); Anderson v. H.M., 317 N.W.2d 394, 402 (N.D.1982) (similar). 1996Compare In Interest of N.W., 531 N.W.2d 303, 307 (N.D.1995) (when hearing to extend foster care not held timely, dismissal serves no practical purpose except to delay stability in lives of children); Anderson v. H.M., 317 N.W.2d 394, 402 (N.D.1982) (similar). | 2 | 2 |
In the Interest of D.H.green2 sentences2003Id. at 315. 2003Id. at 315 . | 1 | 2 |
O'Callaghan v. L.B.green2 sentences1990This section provides in relevant part: “Before making its decision in an involuntary treatment hearing, the court shall review a report assessing the availability and appropriateness for the respondent of treatment programs other than hospitalization which has been prepared and submitted by the state hospital or treatment facility.” In this case, the State Hospital supplied a report entitled “REPORT ASSESSING AVAILABILITY AND APPROPRIATENESS OF ALTERNATIVE TREATMENT.” We find that the report submitted complied with the requirements of the statute and as required under O’Callaghan v. L.B., 447 1990This section provides in relevant part: "Before making its decision in an involuntary treatment hearing, the court shall review a report assessing the availability and appropriateness for the respondent of treatment programs other than hospitalization which has been prepared and submitted by the state hospital or treatment facility." In this case, the State Hospital supplied a report entitled "REPORT ASSESSING AVAILABILITY AND APPROPRIATENESS OF ALTERNATIVE TREATMENT." We find that the report submitted complied with the requirements of the statute and as required under O'Callaghan v. L.B., 447 | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Dakota. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Davis v. State
green
2 sentences2008Id. 2008Id. | 2 | 2008–2008 |
In Re CS
green
2 sentences2006C.S., 2006 ND 104, ¶ 14 , 713 N.W.2d 542 (quoting R.Z., at 488). [¶ 11] In this case, the district court did not engage in a colloquy regarding the respondent’s competency to waive counsel at the preliminary hearing or at the treatment hearing. 2006C.S., 2006 ND 104, ¶ 14 , 713 N.W.2d 542 (quoting R.Z., at 488). [¶ 11] In this case, the district court did not engage in a colloquy regarding the respondent’s competency to waive counsel at the preliminary hearing or at the treatment hearing. | 2 | 2006–2006 |
In Interest of Ebertz
green
2 sentences1996The trial court’s schedule was “a legitimate factor for ... good cause to continue an involuntary treatment hearing,” the Hospital urges, citing In Interest of Nyflot, 340 N.W.2d 178 (N.D.1983) and In Interest of Ebertz, 333 N.W.2d 786 (N.D.1983), because “[t]he purpose of the statute is for the benefit of the [patient] and the determination as to the [patient’s] need for treatment.” Even if there was “insufficient cause” here, the Hospital argues, the delay was not serious enough to abandon the treatment ordered after a completed hearing. 1996The trial court's schedule was "a legitimate factor for ... good cause to continue an involuntary treatment hearing," the Hospital urges, citing In Interest of Nyflot, 340 N.W.2d 178 (N.D.1983) and In Interest of Ebertz, 333 N.W.2d 786 (N.D.1983), because "[t]he purpose of the statute is for the benefit of the [patient] and the determination as to the [patient's] need for treatment." Even if there was "insufficient cause" here, the Hospital argues, the delay was not serious enough to abandon the treatment ordered after a completed hearing. | 2 | 1996–1996 |
In Interest of Nyflot
green
2 sentences1996When viewed in light of the burdens which would be placed upon the [patient], the court, and the county, were the ... court to be reversed and the whole process begun anew, as well as the manifest objectives of [the chapter on Commitment Procedures for Mental and Physical Illness or Disability], we conclude that the final treatment hearing in [this] case was continued for ‘good cause.’ Nyflot, 340 N.W.2d at 183 . 1996When viewed in light of the burdens which would be placed upon the [patient], the court, and the county, were the ... court to be reversed and the whole process begun anew, as well as the manifest objectives of [the chapter on Commitment Procedures for Mental and Physical Illness or Disability], we conclude that the final treatment hearing in [this] case was continued for `good cause.' Nyflot, 340 N.W.2d at 183 . | 2 | 1996–1996 |
In Re DA
neutral
2 sentences2006N.D.C.C. § 25-03.1-18.1(2)(a); D.A, 2005 ND 116, ¶ 10 , 698 N.W.2d 474 . [¶ 16] The law also requires the court to inquire whether the respondent has had a sufficient opportunity to prepare for the forced medication hearing. 2006N.D.C.C. § 25-03.1-18.1(2)(a); D.A, 2005 ND 116, ¶ 10 , 698 N.W.2d 474 . [¶ 16] The law also requires the court to inquire whether the respondent has had a sufficient opportunity to prepare for the forced medication hearing. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Winkjer v. Herr
green
2 sentences2004Id. at 587-88 . 2004Id. at 587-88 . | 1 | 2004–2004 |
In the Interest of J.A.D.
green
1 sentence1993NDCC § 25-OS.1-02(11); J.A.D., supra. At the treatment hearing dated September 8, 1993, psychiatrist Dennis Kottke, M.D., testified that he, as well as Dr. S.J. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.