Laura H. v. Laura H.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that despite case law addressing compliance with the Code, \this issue's recurrence indicates both (1) a need still exists for guidance in this 12 area and (2) the likeliness of future recurrence in other mental-health cases\
• explaining the frequent recurrence of an issue demonstrates both that further authoritative guidance is needed and the issue is likely to recur
• lack of compliance with section 2—102(a—5) rendered the trial court’s order against the manifest weight of the evidence
• because a stack of papers in the common-law record regarding the medications was not admitted into evidence at the hearing, those papers could not support the involuntary-treatment order
• review of whether there has been compliance with section 2-102(a-5) is de novo
• review of whether there has been compliance with section 2-102(a-5) is de novo

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

11 cases in this archive cite this case.

• In re Tiffany W.
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 2012-09-21· cited 75×
• In re Rita P.
  Illinois Supreme Court· 2014-06-27· cited 60×
• In Re Vanessa K.
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 2011-08-17· cited 43×
• In re Marcus S.
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 2022-01-18· cited 10×
• In re E.F.
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 2014-10-10· cited 9×
• In re Bobby F.
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 2012-06-01· cited 9×
• In re Beverly B.
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 2017-12-15· cited 7×
• In re Steven T.
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 2014-10-27· cited 6×
• In re Linda B.
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 2015-05-08· cited 6×
• In re Carolyn J.S.
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 2024-04-23· cited 2×
• In re Nicholas L.
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 2011-02-16