On Point blog, page 1 of 1
Evidence at recommitment hearing was insufficient to establish dangerousness; appeal of transfer to inpatient treatment is moot
Trempealeau County DSS v. T.M.M., 2021AP100 & Trempealeau County DSS v. T.M.M., 2021AP139, District 3, 11/12/21 (one-judge opinions; both ineligible for publication); case activity: 2021AP100 & 2021AP139
The court of appeals agrees with T.M.M. (“Tiffany”) that the evidence presented at her recommitment hearing was insufficient to prove she was dangerous under one of the standards listed in § 51.20(1)(a)2. The court also rejects as moot her appeal of an order transferring her under § 51.35(1)(e) to a more restrictive placement while she was still under the original commitment order.
Transfer of person committed under ch. 51 from outpatient to inpatient setting was lawful
Jackson County v. T.A.L., 2021AP499, District 4, 8/5/21 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
T.A.L.’s transfer from outpatient status to a locked inpatient unit based on his medical needs didn’t violate the requirements of § 51.35.
SCOW: Not all transfers of patients to more restrictive settings are subject to review within 10 days under § 51.35(1)(e)
Manitowoc County v. Samuel J.H., 2013 WI 68, on certification from court of appeals; majority opinion by Justice Ziegler; case activity
Transfer of a person committed under ch. 51 to a more restrictive setting within an inpatient placement, or from outpatient to inpatient placement, is subject to § 51.35(1). The statute recognizes two different bases for transfer: reasonable medical or clinical judgment;
Manitowoc County v. Samuel J. H., 2012AP665, WSC review granted 11/14/12
on review of certification; case activity
Issue (from Certification)
Whether our holding in Fond du Lac County v. Elizabeth M.P., 2003 WI App 232, ¶¶26, 28, 267 Wis. 2d 739, 672 N.W.2d 88, that “Wisconsin Stat. § 51.35(1)(e) mandates that a patient transferred to a more restrictive environment receive a hearing within ten days of said transfer,” is contrary to the plain language of the statute.
Manitowoc County v. Samuel J. H., 2012AP665, District 2, 9/5/12, WSC review granted 11/14/12
court of appeals certification, supreme court review granted 11/14/12; case activity
§ 51.35(1)(e) Patient Transfer, Time Limits
Issue certified:
Whether our holding in Fond du Lac County v. Elizabeth M.P., 2003 WI App 232, ¶¶26, 28, 267 Wis. 2d 739, 672 N.W.2d 88, that “Wisconsin Stat. § 51.35(1)(e) mandates that a patient transferred to a more restrictive environment receive a hearing within ten days of said transfer,” is contrary to the plain language of the statute.
Ch. 51 Time Limits: Hearing to Review Transfer to Inpatient Status
Fond du Lac County v. Elizabeth M.P., 2003 WI App 232
For Elizabeth M.P.: Thomas K. Voss
Issue: Whether the circuit court had jurisdiction to transfer Elizabeth, who was on outpatient status under ch. 51, to inpatient status given that judicial review of the county’s transfer decision wasn’t held within 10 days, contrary to § 51.35(1)(e)3.
Holding:
¶28. Wisconsin Stat.