Legal Opinion

In re Weinstock

New York Supreme Court

Decided March 6, 2001PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Anthony J. Cutrona, J.

Petitioner, Kingboro Psychiatric Center (petitioner), commenced this special proceeding in Kings County seeking authorization for assisted outpatient treatment (ACT) for patient respondent Julio H. (respondent), pursuant to Mental Hygiene Law § 9.60 (Kendra’s Law). At the hearing, petitioner introduced into evidence, as a basis for satisfying one of the required criteria enumerated in Mental Hygiene Law § 9.60, that respondent assaulted a staff psychiatrist during his present hospitalization.

Mental Hygiene Law § 9.60 (c) (4) states in pertinent part:

“(…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Rivers v. KatzNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
  2. Donaldson v. DaleyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
  3. Ford v. Daniel R.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
  4. In re DaileyNew York Supreme Court · 2000

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. In re WeinstockAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
  2. In re WeinstockNew York Supreme Court · 2002

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

Powered by the Exa API