Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

e. Dangerousness

Outagamie County v. R.W., 2020AP1171-FT, 12/17/20, District 3, (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity Nobody testified that Rachel behaved dangerously during her extant commitment. Her doctor had no knowledge of medication non-compliance.  A social worker once saw a Haldol pill on a plate on a counter and inferred that Rachel had not taken her… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Fond Du Lac County v. R.O.V., 2019AP1228, 2020AP853, 12/16/20, District 2 (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity In these consolidated cases, the court of appeals reviewed both Ray’s initial commitment and his 2nd recommitment (not his 1st recommitment), which has not yet ended. Although the initial commitment order expired long ago, the court held… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Portage County v. L.E., 2020Ap1239-FT, District 4, 10/29/20 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity The evidence presented at L.E.’s ch. 51 extenstion hearing was sufficient to prove she was dangerous and was not competent to refuse medication. ¶21     …. [Doctor] Khalil’s testimony was not so vague, equivocal, or lacking [as to fail… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Portage County v. E.R.R., 2020AP870-FT, District 4, 10/1/20 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity As the supreme court recently emphasized, at a proceeding to extend a ch. 51 commitment, proving dangerousness under § 51.20(1)(am) requires evidence establishing that the person is likely to be dangerous under one of the specific standards in § 51.20(1)(a)2… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Waupaca County v. K.E.K., 2018AP1887, petition for review of an unpublished court of appeals decision granted 7/24/20; case activity Issues presented: Did the circuit court lose competency to conduct a recommitment hearing because the County did not file the evaluation of K.E.K. at least 21 days before the expiration of her commitment, as required by… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Fond du Lac County v. S.N.W., 2020AP274-FT, District 2, 7/15/20 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication), petition  for review granted 11/19/20; case activity The testimony of the county’s expert provided sufficient evidence of dangerousness under § 51.20(1)(a)2.b. and (1)(am). ¶9     The evidence in the record before us establishes that S.N.W. has a history of “singling… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Winnebago County v. S.H., 2020 WI App 46; case activity The court of appeals rarely publishes opinions in “fast track” cases. It took that unusual step here. The opinion strives to show the type of evidence that is sufficient for a recommitment even though the mentally ill person has taken all of her medication and… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Winnebago County v. L. F.-G., 2019AP2010, 5/20/20, District 2 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity This is an appeal of the extension of the commitment of someone the court calls “Emily.” Following our supreme court’s decision in Portage County v. J.W.K., 2019 WI 54, ¶19, 386 Wis. 2d 672, 927 N.W.2d 509, the court… Read more

{ 0 comments }