Kentucky Supreme Court· 8/26/2004
Woods Ex Rel. Simpson v. Commonwealth
Citations
- 142 S.W.3d 24
- 2004 Ky. LEXIS 187
- 2004 WL 1906431
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- concluding that “[i]f the surrogate, as here, is a judicially-appointed guardian, and the physicians, family and ethics committee agree with the guardian’s decision, there is no need to seek court approval”
- holding right to self-determination implies right to refuse unwanted medical treatment
- limit imposed “[t]o preclude the possibility of . . . an unconstitutional application” of the statute
- noting the “constitutional right of self-determination”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Cooper, Lambert, Johnstone, Keller, Graves, Wintersheimer, Stumbo
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
15 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Morgan v. GetterKentucky Supreme Court· 2014-09-18· cited 147×
- Fletcher v. CommonwealthKentucky Supreme Court· 2005-05-19· cited 41×
- Baze v. ReesKentucky Supreme Court· 2006-11-22· cited 31×
- Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. v. RobertsKentucky Supreme Court· 2012-05-24· cited 17×
- Morton v. TiptonMissouri Court of Appeals· 2019-03-14· cited 11×
- Harrison Silvergrove Property, LLC v. Campbell County & Municipal Board of AdjustmentCourt of Appeals of Kentucky· 2016-07-08· cited 10×
- In re D.L.H.Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2009-02-10· cited 3×
- In re the Guardianship of TschumyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota· 2013-07-29· cited 3×
- Rodney P. v. Stacy B.Kentucky Supreme Court· 2005-08-25· cited 1×
- Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government v. Lexhl, LPCourt of Appeals of Kentucky· 2009-11-13
- Lawton v. HigginsSuperior Court of Rhode Island· 2008-06-13
- In re Guardianship of L.N.Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 2020-02-19
- Lozada Tirado v. Tirado FlechaSupreme Court of Puerto Rico· 2010-01-27
- Lexington Alzheimer's Investors, LLC D/B/A the Lantern at Morning Pointe Alzheimer's Center of Excellence v. Sandra Norris, as Administratrix of the Estate of Rayford Charles NorrisKentucky Supreme Court· 2025-08-14
- Nathan Torian, Individually, and as a Representative of a Class of Similarly Situated Persons Comprising the Unincorporated Labor Organization, the International Association of Fire Fighters, Local 168 v. City of Paducah, KentuckyKentucky Supreme Court· 2025-12-18
Cites
93 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Santosky v. KramerSupreme Court· 1982-02-22· cited 9,761×
- City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc.Supreme Court· 1985-07-01· cited 7,112×
- Whitley v. AlbersSupreme Court· 1986-03-04· cited 6,155×
- Roe v. WadeSupreme Court· 1973-01-22· cited 5,581×
- Griswold v. ConnecticutSupreme Court· 1965-06-07· cited 4,329×
- Greenholtz v. Inmates of the Nebraska Penal & Correctional ComplexSupreme Court· 1979-05-29· cited 3,299×
- Addington v. TexasSupreme Court· 1979-04-30· cited 3,004×
- Washington v. GlucksbergSupreme Court· 1997-06-26· cited 2,664×
- Youngberg v. Romeo Ex Rel. RomeoSupreme Court· 1982-06-18· cited 2,433×
- Nebraska Press Assn. v. StuartSupreme Court· 1976-06-30· cited 1,758×
- Washington v. HarperSupreme Court· 1990-04-16· cited 1,489×
- United States v. MorrisonSupreme Court· 2000-05-15· cited 1,467×
- Lawrence v. TexasSupreme Court· 2003-06-26· cited 1,452×
- Jackson v. IndianaSupreme Court· 1972-06-07· cited 1,284×
- Woodby v. Immigration & Naturalization ServiceSupreme Court· 1966-12-12· cited 1,005×
- Bowers v. HardwickSupreme Court· 1986-09-11· cited 953×
- Cruzan Ex Rel. Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of HealthSupreme Court· 1990-06-25· cited 946×
- Union Pacific Railway Co. v. BotsfordSupreme Court· 1891-05-25· cited 688×
- In Re Zeth S.California Supreme Court· 2003-08-04· cited 665×
- Bing v. ThunigNew York Court of Appeals· 1957-05-16· cited 502×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.