People v. Barbara 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 outright reversal, rather than remand, was appropriate in light of Code violations
• finding that the first criterion under the capable-of-repetition exception had been met because the order was limited to 90 days
• explaining that although the statute providing a right to counsel only “refers to involuntary admissions, it is equally applicable to proceedings with respect to the involuntary administration of psychotropic medication”
• recognizing exception to the mootness doctrine when the complaining party demonstrates that: “(1) the challenged action is in its duration too short to be fully litigated prior to its cessation and (2
• cautioning that as a general rule, courts of review do not “render advisory opinions, or consider issues where the result will not be affected regardless of how those issues are decided”
• a decision is advisory if it cannot result in appropriate relief to the prevailing party

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).