In Re Mh2014-002674
Court of Appeals of Arizona
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
PORTLEY, Judge:
¶ 1 Appellant, who is deaf, challenges the trial court’s order that she undergo a combination of inpatient and outpatient treatment at a mental health treatment facility. She argues that her statutorily defined due process rights were violated because the court-ordered evaluations were conducted through written communications despite her request for an American Sign Language (“ASL”) interpreter. Because a reasonable attempt was made to secure an ASL interpreter and Appellant effectively communicated with both evaluating doctors during the evaluations, we find no due…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Tucker v. TennesseeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2008
- In Re the Appeal in Maricopa County of Mental Health Case No. MH 94-00592Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1995
- HCZ Construction Inc. v. First Franklin Financial Corp.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2001
- Southwest Soil Remediation, Inc. v. City of TucsonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2001
- In Re the Appeal in Pima County Mental Health Service Action No. MH-1140-6-93.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1993
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- In Re Pima County Mental Health Case No. Mh20200860Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2022