Bigley v. Alaska Psychiatric Institute

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding in the involuntary medication context that “the court was required to evaluate whether [the respondent’s] proposed alternative would be feasible and effective in promoting the same compelling state interests that justified API’s proposed treatment” (emphasis added)
• clarifying that Myers factors “consideration by the trial court is mandatory”
• explaining existence of less restrictive alternative is mixed question of law and fact
• stating proposed alternative “must actually be available, meaning that it is feasible and would actually satisfy the compelling state interests that justify the proposed state action”
• noting that Civil Rule 8 does not “require details of evidence that a claimant will offer to establish a claim,” and “is satisfied by a brief statement that gives the defendant fair notice of the claim and the grounds upon which it rests” (cleaned up) (citation omitted)
• describing \the state's parens patriae power\ as \the 'inherent power and authority of the state to protect \the person and property\ of an individual who \lack[s] legal age or capacity\ ' \ (alterations in original

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).