Gieseking v. Schafer

How courts have described this case

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

• mentally disabled individual had no due process liberty interest in being in treatment in least restrictive environment under Youngberg because he was admitted voluntarily
• “[T]he courts have uniformly rejected the notion that mentally retarded and developmentally disabled individuals have a constitutionally-founded right to receive treatment in the least restrictive alternative.”
• “[T]he courts have uniformly rejected the notion that mentally retarded and developmentally disabled individuals have a constitutionally-founded right to receive treatment in the least restrictive alternative.”
• “As with other federal-state cooperative programs, the [Developmental Disabilities] Act is voluntary, and states are given the choice of complying with the conditions set forth in the Act or foregoing the benefits of federal funding.“

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).