Legal Opinion · Dissent

Matter of Herman

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided January 29, 1993No. 90-FM-815Published

1DissentRogers, Chief Judge

In addressing the contentions of Ms. Herman that her personal liberty was unlawfully interfered with, the court is called upon to construe a statute. The statute, known as the Ervin Act,1 provides a comprehensive scheme designed to protect individual liberty again those who seek to confine a person in a mental hospital. In construing the statute, the court must look at the plain words of the statute and, where necessary for an understanding of the language, at the legislative history. See Peoples Drug Stores, Inc. v. District of Columbia, 470 A.2d 751, 764 (D.C.1983) (en banc); see also…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. Logan v. Zimmerman Brush Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
  2. Olmstead v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
  3. Frisbie v. CollinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
  4. Humphrey v. CadySupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  5. National Railroad Passenger Corporation v. National Assn. of Railroad PassengersSupreme Court of the United States · 1974

26 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