Legal Opinion

Jarvis v. Levine

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided January 15, 1988No. C2-86-1633PublishedCited by 62 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

YETKA, Justice.

Appellant Homer Jarvis seeks review of a decision of the court of appeals which held that involuntary treatment with neuro-leptic drugs was not an intrusive treatment per se and thus did not require court approval to administer under the procedural requirements of Price v. Sheppard, 307 Minn. 250, 239 N.W.2d 905 (1976). He also seeks review of the court’s determination that his claim for post-medication review and damages is moot.

We reverse the court of appeals in part, affirm in part and remand.

I

Homer Jarvis was indeterminately committed to the Minnesota Security…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  2. Youngberg v. Romeo Ex Rel. RomeoSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  3. Guardianship of RoeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1981
  4. Price v. SheppardSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1976
  5. Davis v. HubbardDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 1980

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by62 opinions

  1. In re C.E.Illinois Supreme Court · 1994
  2. In Re CEIllinois Supreme Court · 1994
  3. Kahn v. GriffinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2005
  4. Matter of BlilieSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1993
  5. Women of the State v. GomezSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1995

57 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API