History:
L. 1965, ch. 348, § 24; L. 1967, ch. 319, § 1; L. 1976, ch. 243, § 27; L. 1982, ch. 238, § 2; L. 1986, ch. 211, § 20; L. 1990, ch. 92, § 29; Repealed, L. 1996, ch. 167, § 65; April 18.
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Applied; instructions to jury in murder prosecution upheld; verbatim quoting of K.S.A. 22-3428 not required. State v. Hamilton, 216 Kan. 559, 565 534 P.2d 226.
2. Duty of superintendent and physicians of hospital to patient and public; liability for release of dangerous patient. Durflinger v. Artiles, 234 Kan. 484, 492, 503, 673 P.2d 86 (1983).
3. Liability of staff doctors of state institution for release of patient prior to tort claims act. Durflinger v. Artiles, 727 F.2d 888, 909 (1984).
Durflinger v. Artiles, 673 P.2d 86 (Kan. 1983). · cites it 4דGetz was granted summary judgment on the basis that, as superintendent of the *487 hospital, he was a public officer acting pursuant to a special statutory duty when he approved Bradley’s hospital dismissal (K.S.A. 1973 Supp. 59-2924). Dr. Francisco Izaguirre (psychiatrist) was…”
Durflinger v. Artiles, 727 F.2d 888 (10th Cir. 1984). · cites it 4דGetz was granted summary judgment on the basis that, as superintendent of the hospital, he was a public officer acting pursuant to a special statutory duty when he approved Bradley's hospital dismissal (K.S.A.1973 Supp. 59-2924). Dr. Francisco Izaguirre (psychiatrist) was…”
Boulanger v. Pol, 900 P.2d 823 (Kan. 1995). · cites it 2דThe ‘head of the hospital’ was required to discharge Bradley when he was ‘no longer in need of “care and treatment” ’ (K.S.A. 1973 Supp. 59-2924), i.e., no longer dangerous to himself or others.”
Durflinger v. Artiles, 727 F.2d 888 (10th Cir. 1984). · cites it 4דGetz was granted summary judgment on the basis that, as superintendent of the hospital, he was a public officer acting pursuant to a special statutory duty when he approved Bradley’s hospital dismissal (K.S.A.1973 Supp. 59-2924). Dr. Francisco Izaguirre (psychiatrist) was…”
State v. Ordway, 934 P.2d 94 (Kan. 1997). “(K.S.A. 1974 Supp. 59-2924.) We cannot presume a legislative intent that all the statutory details be incorporated in an instruction to the jury.”
Hesler v. Osawatomie State Hosp., 971 P.2d 1169 (Kan. 1999). “The hospital was required to provide care or treatment for Bradley and to discharge Bradley only when he was no longer in need of care or treatment within the purview of K.”
Hokansen v. United States, 868 F.2d 372 (10th Cir. 1989). · cites it 2דIt is true that the Durflinger opinion refers to the determination by the head of the hospital, which was required, that the mentally ill patient there be discharged when “no longer in need of ‘care and treatment,’ ” citing K.S.A. 59-2924 (Supp.1973). And the Durflinger opinion…”
Hokansen v. United States, 868 F.2d 372 (10th Cir. 1989). · cites it 3דThe 'head of the hospital' was required to discharge [the mental patient] when he was 'no longer in need of "care and treatment" ' (K.S.A.1973 Supp. 59-2924 ), i.e. no longer dangerous to himself or others.”
Quintero v. Encarnacion (10th Cir. 2000). “Kan. Stat. Ann. § 59-2924 (c) and (d) (repealed 1996) provided that the “head of the treatment facility,” here Getz and then Lee, was authorized to release Ms.”
— K.S.A. § 59-2924(c) — 1 case
Boulanger v. Pol, 900 P.2d 823 (Kan. 1995). “The ‘head of the hospital’ was required to discharge Bradley when he was ‘no longer in need of “care and treatment” ’ (K.S.A. 1973 Supp. 59-2924), i.e., no longer dangerous to himself or others.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.