Free v. G.K.S.
809 N.W.2d 335
| N.D. | 2012Background
- Dr. Madeline Free petitioned for involuntary commitment of G.K.S. on November 25, 2011, alleging chemical dependence and risk of serious harm absent treatment.
- A hearing under N.D.C.C. § 25-08.1-19 occurred on November 30, 2011, resulting in a finding that G.K.S. was chemically dependent and required treatment, with an order for up to 90 days of inpatient treatment at the State Hospital.
- G.K.S. filed an expedited appeal under N.D.R.App.P. 2.1 on December 19, 2011.
- On December 15, 2011, G.K.S. was released from the State Hospital; Dr. Free submitted a notice of release and requested an order of dismissal.
- The district court dismissed the 90-day treatment order on December 22, 2011, based on the notice of release.
- This Court later held the appeal moot because the involuntary commitment order was vacated by the district court’s dismissal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the appeal moot after dismissal vacates the order? | G.K.S. argues the petition and findings may still have legal effect and are not moot. | State concedes the order was vacated; appeal mootness remains the central question. | Appeal dismissed as moot. |
| Whether the district court had sufficient evidence to sustain the findings of chemical dependence and need for treatment. | G.K.S. contends evidence was insufficient to support the findings. | State concedes insufficient evidence; findings were not properly supported. | Court dismissed as moot; merits not reached due to mootness. |
| Whether failure to consider least restrictive alternative affects the order. | G.K.S. argues alternatives were not considered. | State concedes alternative treatment was not considered due to lack of evidence. | Not reached due to mootness; merits not decided. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Guardianship/Conservatorship of Van Sickle, 694 N.W.2d 212 (ND 2005) (mootness and potential for appellate review when issues become moot)
- In re D.P.O., 692 N.W.2d 128 (ND 2005) (threshold mootness and appellate review limitations)
- In re E.T., 617 N.W.2d 470 (ND 2000) (mootness considerations and when no genuine controversy exists)
- In re W.O., 673 N.W.2d 264 (ND 2004) (mootness and potential for repetition evading review)
- Millang v. Hahn, 582 N.W.2d 665 (ND 1998) (collateral consequences as a factor in mootness)
- Matter of Contempt of Grajedas, 515 N.W.2d 444 (ND 1994) (avoidance of advisory opinions; mootness doctrine)
- Varnson v. Satram, 368 N.W.2d 533 (ND 1985) (definition of mootness when no practical relief available)
- Interest of R.M., 763 N.W.2d 799 (ND 2009) (summary reversal appropriate when insufficient evidence supports commitment)