Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Pyle v. Brooks

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided November 7, 1977No. 93202, CA 5703; 93203, CA 7107Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partThornton, J.

While I concur with the majority on the second point, namely, that the summary judgment for defendant in the declaratory judgment action was proper, I disagree on the first point, namely, that the writ of habeas corpus should issue.

The opinion concludes that inasmuch as the Mental Health Division failed to promulgate rules and regulations governing the voluntary commitment of minors, the instant voluntary commitment was a nullity.

This issue was not briefed or argued by the parties. In view of the effect the majority’s decision on this point may have upon similar prior commitments, I think we…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. American Power & Light Co. v. Securities & Exchange CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
  2. Weiner v. State Real Estate CommissionNebraska Supreme Court · 1969

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

Powered by the Exa API