Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Appeals Court asked to apply Matter of JP and vacate civil-commitment order in RB matter
Summary
Appellant argued the civil-commitment order under Section 35 should be vacated because the petitioners failed to present clinical testimony diagnosing a substance use disorder and because a clinician’s written report was not admitted into evidence and appears to have been filed after the order.
Appellate counsel for RB told the court the civil-commitment order issued under Section 35 should be vacated because the petitioners did not put forward clinical testimony diagnosing a substance use disorder and because the clinician’s written report was not in evidence and appears to have been filed after entry of the order.
Eric Beal, arguing for the appellant, urged the panel to apply the Supreme Judicial Court’s recent decision in Matter of…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
