In Re: Walter Peterson, Jr.
E2015-01211-COA-R3-CV
| Tenn. Ct. App. | Nov 15, 2016Background
- DHS obtained a warrant and entered Dr. Walter Peterson Jr.’s home after a report of possible abuse/neglect; Dr. Peterson was removed and hospitalized in January 2015.
- DHS petitioned under the Tennessee Adult Protection Act for authority to consent to protective services; the chancery court granted DHS interim protective custody and appointed temporary guardians and counsel.
- After a five-day trial, the chancery court found Dr. Peterson lacked capacity, was in imminent danger, and needed protective services; it authorized DHS custody and appointed temporary guardians (orders entered March 12 and May 26, 2015).
- Mrs. Sheila Peterson unsuccessfully sought dismissal, release of Dr. Peterson, and subpoenas for his deposition and medical records; she appealed the protective-custody and discovery rulings.
- Subsequent events: Dr. Peterson was discharged to his wife’s care, DHS’s protective custody and guardianship were later terminated, and Dr. Peterson died in July 2016.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court failed to apply the Adult Protection Act’s "least restrictive" requirement. | Mrs. Peterson: court erred by not imposing least restrictive means. | DHS: subsequent events render the claim moot. | Moot — appeal dismissed. |
| Whether the court improperly quashed Sheila Peterson’s subpoena to have Dr. Peterson participate/testify. | Mrs. Peterson: denial violated respondent’s right to participate. | DHS: appeal challenges a now-terminated custody order; moot. | Moot — appeal dismissed. |
| Whether the court abused discretion by quashing subpoenas for Dr. Peterson’s medical records. | Mrs. Peterson: denial impeded defense against conservatorship. | DHS: reversal would provide no practical relief given Dr. Peterson’s death. | Moot — appeal dismissed. |
| Whether allowing a protective petition against a non-party delayed Dr. Peterson’s release. | Mrs. Peterson: hearing on non-party caused delay (raised in reply). | DHS: issues arising after final order are not before this appeal and events moot. | Not reached on merits; later events moot. |
Key Cases Cited
- Alliance for Native Am. Indian Rights in Tenn., Inc. v. Nicely, 182 S.W.3d 333 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005) (mootness and justiciability principles)
- Norma Faye Pyles Lynch Family Purpose LLC v. Putnam Cnty., 301 S.W.3d 196 (Tenn. 2009) (courts decide live controversies and avoid abstract opinions)
- Nelson v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 8 S.W.3d 625 (Tenn. 1999) (standard of review for questions of law)
- McIntyre v. Traughber, 884 S.W.2d 134 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1994) (a case must remain justiciable through appeal)