Legal Opinion

Conservatorship of Early

California Supreme Court

Decided December 22, 1983No. S.F. 24580PublishedCited by 42 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

THE COURT.

The underlying issue in this case concerns the nature of the evidence which a jury properly may consider in determining whether a person is “gravely disabled’’ and, therefore, subject to a conservatorship proceeding and possible involuntary confinement under the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act (LPS Act). (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 5000 et seq.; unless otherwise designated, all further statutory references are to that code.)

We will agree with appellant’s contention that in determining whether he is “gravely disabled” a jury is entitled to consider the availability of third party…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Olmstead v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
  2. O'Connor v. DonaldsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  3. Estate of McDillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
  4. Conservatorship of RouletCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
  5. Paularena v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965

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

3Cited by42 opinions

  1. People v. LewisCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
  2. People v. FigueroaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1986
  3. People v. HurtadoCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
  4. Conservatorship of BaberCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984
  5. San Diego County Department of Social Services v. WalkerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1987

37 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