In re D. J. M.

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Horn, J. A. D.

The single issue raised in this appeal is whether, in a routine review of the civil commitment *499of a mental patient, that patient, acting through the Public Advocate, may inject into the proceedings, without notice, the question of the quality of the medical care that he is receiving in the public institution to which he is confined.

The trial judge held that he could not do so. Wo agree and affirm.

The so-called routine or periodic review of such cases is now undertaken under R. 4:74 — 7 (e) and (f). These subsections, as paraphrased to…