In Re Condry

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that MHPA § 303(g) requires neither the taking of evidence in the nature of a de novo hearing, nor the submission of the transcript of the MHRO hearing, but \only such evidence as the court may receive or require\
• holding that MHPA § 303(g) requires neither the taking of evidence in the nature of a de novo hearing, nor the submission of the transcript of the MHRO hearing, but “only such evidence as the court may receive or require”
• vacating an order that upheld an involuntary commitment because \the statutory requirements [of the MHPA] were not strictly adhered to[.]\
• vacating an order that upheld an involuntary commitment because “the statutory requirements [of the MHPA] were not strictly adhered to”
• appeals from involuntary commitment orders which have expired are not moot because involuntary commitment affects an important liberty interest, and because by their nature most involuntary commitment orders expire before appellate review is possible
• reversed because certification did not include the required description of treatment

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).