Legal Opinion

In re M.T.

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided April 25, 2001No. 00-0886PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

TERNUS, Justice.

The appellant, M.T., was involuntarily committed after a court hearing at which he was not present. On appeal, he claims that his statutory and constitutional right to be present at the hearing was violated. At oral argument, M.T.’s attorney stated that respondent does not request a remand for another hearing because M.T. has since been released from inpatient treatment and has returned to his home.

Despite the fact that this court’s decision will have no effect in the underlying matter, we conclude that this case falls within an exception to the mootness doctrine. On the…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Addington v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. Super Tire Engineering Co. v. McCorkleSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  3. People v. Barbara H.Illinois Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Doremus v. FarrellDistrict Court, D. Nebraska · 1975
  5. Suzuki v. QuisenberryDistrict Court, D. Hawaii · 1976

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

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. State v. Hernandez-LopezSupreme Court of Iowa · 2002
  2. In the Matter of B.B., Alleged to Be Seriously Mentally Impaired, B.B.Supreme Court of Iowa · 2013
  3. Edward Crowell v. State Public Defender v. Iowa District Court for Linn CountySupreme Court of Iowa · 2014
  4. Clarke County Reservoir Commission v. Linda Sue AbbottSupreme Court of Iowa · 2015
  5. Rhiner v. StateSupreme Court of Iowa · 2005

29 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