2018 IL App (3d) 170155
Ill. App. Ct.2018Background
- Respondent Wilma T., a 62‑year‑old woman with chronic paranoid schizophrenia, was brought to Trinity Hospital and voluntarily admitted to its Robert Young Mental Health Center on Jan 26, 2017.
- Nurses filed a petition for involuntary admission on Feb 17, 2017 stating Wilma had requested discharge; the “request” was unsigned by Wilma and signed by nurses noting she refused to sign.
- Dr. Rickey Wilson filed a petition to administer psychotropic medication (Risperdal Consta injections), alleging Wilma refused medication, posed potential harm, and could not be safe in a less restrictive environment.
- At hearings Dr. Wilson testified Wilma lacked insight, had prior rapid readmissions, refused oral meds, exhibited threatening/agitated behavior, and had some prior partial response to medication.
- The trial court granted both the 90‑day involuntary commitment and the medication petitions; Wilma appealed, raising statutory noncompliance: no written discharge request before involuntary commitment and no written notice of alternatives to psychotropic medication.
- The appellate court found the appeal moot as to the expired 90‑day order but applied the "capable of repetition, yet evading review" exception and reversed both orders for statutory noncompliance.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether involuntary commitment may proceed when a voluntary patient purportedly requests discharge but fails to provide written notice as required by statute | State conceded Wilma did not file written discharge notice but argued forfeiture/plain‑error doctrines should permit affirmance | Wilma argued statutory requirement (written request) was not met, so involuntary proceedings were improper | Reversed: involuntary admission invalid because no written discharge request preceded involuntary proceedings (strict statutory compliance required) |
| Whether psychotropic medication may be involuntarily administered without providing written notice of less‑restrictive alternatives | State argued Wilma could not understand written information and distribution would be a useless formality; pointed to verbal discussion and pharmacy printout | Wilma argued written notice of alternatives is mandatory and cannot be satisfied verbally or waived | Reversed: medication order invalid for failure to provide required written notice of alternatives (statute requires strict compliance) |
Key Cases Cited
- In re James E., 207 Ill. 2d 105 (discusses prerequisite of written discharge request before involuntary proceedings)
- In re Splett, 143 Ill. 2d 225 (oral requests insufficient; involuntary order invalid absent written request)
- In re Robert S., 213 Ill. 2d 30 (mootness of expired involuntary commitment order)
- In re Alfred H.H., 233 Ill. 2d 345 (exceptions to mootness doctrine analyzed)
- People v. Davis, 65 Ill. 2d 157 (judicial notice of matters of record in same court)
- In re Bates, 315 Ill. App. 3d 736 (judgment contrary to statute is voidable, not void)
- In re George O., 314 Ill. App. 3d 1044 (appellate consideration of statutory noncompliance analogous to plain error)