In re T.W.
Montana Supreme Court
1DissentJustice Leaphart
¶38 I dissent.
¶39 The Court’s conclusion that the State’s treatment of T.W. does not violate due process ignores the State’s duty to rectify a wrong that it has created. The State placed T.W., against her will, in MDC. In doing so, it restricted her right to physical liberty, a right fundamental under the Montana Constitution. See Matter of C.H. (1984), 210 Mont. 184, 201, 683 P.2d 931, 940. Having done this, the State cannot simply continue to house T.W. as though she remains a committed patient. It is true that when the State determined that T.W. was no longer “seriously developmentally…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Estelle v. GambleSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Youngberg v. Romeo Ex Rel. RomeoSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- In Re Applications for the Commitment of SlSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1983
- Kloss v. Edward D. Jones & Co.Montana Supreme Court · 2002
- Nelson v. DriscollMontana Supreme Court · 1999
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.