In re MH 2008-000438
Court of Appeals of Arizona
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
PORTLEY, Judge.
¶ 1 Appellant challenges his involuntary treatment order. Specifically, he argues that he was not personally examined by two doctors as required by Arizona Revised Statutes (“A.R.S.”) sections 36-501 to -550.07 (2003 and Supp.2008). For the following reasons, we agree and vacate the order.
FACTS
¶ 2 A petition and application for a court ordered evaluation of Appellant was filed on February 27, 2008. The petition alleged that Appellant was a danger to himself and to others. The application, filed by a Magellan 1 case manager who had met with Appellant the day before,…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Wyatt v. WehmuellerArizona Supreme Court · 1991
- Kriz v. Buckeye Petroleum Co., Inc.Arizona Supreme Court · 1985
- In Re Maricopa County Superior Court Number MH 2001-001139Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2002
- In re MH 2006-000749Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
- In Re the Appeal in Maricopa County of Mental Health Case No. MH 94-00592Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1995
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- In Re Pinal County Mental Health No. Mh-201000029Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2010
- In Re Mh2011-000914Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2012
- State Ex Rel. Thomas v. DuncanCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2009
- In Re Mh Xxxx-XxxxxxCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2009
- In Re Mh2009-002120Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2010
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.