Alabama Department of Mental Health v. E.C.J.

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

REL: 11/10/2011 Notice: T h i s o p i n i o n i s s u b j e c t t o formal r e v i s i o n b e f o r e p u b l i c a t i o n i n t h e advance s h e e t s o f Southern R e p o r t e r . R e a d e r s a r e r e q u e s t e d t o n o t i f y t h e R e p o r t e r o f D e c i s i o n s , Alabama A p p e l l a t e C o u r t s , 300 D e x t e r A v e n u e , M o n t g o m e r y , A l a b a m a 3 6 1 0 4 - 3 7 4 1 ((334) 2 2 9 - 0 6 4 9 ) , o f a n y t y p o g r a p h i c a l o r o t h e r e r r o r s , i n o r d e r t h a t c o r r e c t i o n s may b e made b e f o r e t h e o p i n i o n i s p r i n t e d i n Southern R e p o r t e r . ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OCTOBER TERM, 2011-2012 2100682 Alabama Department o f M e n t a l Health v. E.C.J. Appeal MOORE, from L i m e s t o n e J u v e n i l e (JU-07-346.13) Judge. The Alabama Department department") appeals Court Court custody Mental Health from a judgment o f t h e Limestone ("the j u v e n i l e physical of court") o f E.C.J. ordering remain with that ("the Juvenile the legal and t h e department and 2100682 further ordering jurisdiction 1975. We that over the E.C.J., d i s m i s s the juvenile pursuant July committing and who 10, was a department. William "Motion the whose minor Partlow 1, 2011, retaining t o § 1 2 - 1 5 - 4 1 2 , A l a . Code at History juvenile date time, to department Developmental the court entered a of b i r t h the T h e r e a f t e r , the D. February 2009, E.C.J., was appeal. Procedural On court guardian f o r Immediate Review" ad judgment i s February the 6, custody p l a c e d E.C.J. Center litem 1992, of the at the ("Partlow"). f o r E.C.J. On filed a alleging: "1. That t h e u n d e r s i g n e d has j u s t been i n f o r m e d t h a t the c u r r e n t j u v e n i l e commitment of [ E . C . J . ] a t P a r t l o w w i l l e x p i r e on F e b r u a r y 6, 2011. " 2 . To t h e b e s t o f t h e u n d e r s i g n e d ' s k n o w l e d g e , contingency plans for this event have not been finalized." On February Expiration the 4, 115(c), Department § 12-15-410, 12-15-412, department the department filed a of J u v e n i l e Court I n v o l u n t a r y Mental Alabama 12-15-409 & 2011, and of Mental A l a . Code Health 1975." 12-15-102(1), "Notice Commitment t o Pursuant Citing (3), of and §§ to § 12-15- (18), the a s s e r t e d t h a t the j u v e n i l e c o u r t ' s commitment o r d e r 2 2100682 would age on F e b r u a r y of majority. been at expire informed The d e p a r t m e n t and b e l i e v e d [Partlow], for she c o n t i n u e discharge." continue need the the treatment facility and r e c e i v i n g care to reside According to receive care t o be a d m i t t e d there that the i t had professionals t o which [E.C.J.] i s and t r e a t m e n t , until otherwise recommend recommended to the department, " f o r [ E . C . J . ] t o and t r e a t m e n t by v i r t u e from Partlow, of a Legal she w i l l Guardian's custody, D e p a r t m e n t o f Human R e s o u r c e s ' ... c u s t o d y o r v o l u n t a r i l y consent to remain with Partlow she on F e b r u a r y will be an a d u l t requested that the commitment order would the reaching further asserted "that t h e Department currently confined that 6, 2 0 1 1 , u p o n E . C . J . ' s court Court provide desires currently virtue juvenile by custody Resources] or otherwise, need Court of supervision, before her department acknowledge that i t s remain may at Partlow (as i s professionals) by o f Human dependency, c h i l d i n have 18th birthday." 3 on w h e t h e r t h [ e ] i n [ t h e Department v i a delinquency, that 6, 2 0 1 1 , a n d t h a t "guidance treatment vesting etc., the minor's to that The on F e b r u a r y the department f o r [E.C.J.] 6, 2 0 1 1 . " court expire recommended of legal f o r p u r p o s e s o f same g i v e n arisen with this 2100682 On M a r c h 2 5 , 2 0 1 1 , t h e j u v e n i l e c o u r t in which i tstated, i n pertinent entered a judgment part: "The p a r t i e s d i s c u s s e d the issues previously presented to the Court regarding [E.C.J.] reaching h e r 1 9 t h b i r t h d a y . The C o u r t n o t e s t h a t [ E . C . J . ] was c o m m i t t e d t o t h e D e p a r t m e n t ... i n J u l y 2 0 0 9 . T h e r e h a s b e e n no a s s e r t i o n b y t h e D e p a r t m e n t ... t h a t s h e has gained maximum benefit from Institutional t r e a t m e n t o r no l o n g e r i s i n n e e d o f t h e s e r v i c e s o f t h e D e p a r t m e n t o r h a s g a i n e d maximum b e n e f i t f r o m t h e p r o g r a m s o f t h e D e p a r t m e n t . On t h e c o n t r a r y , i n a r e p o r t s u b m i t t e d t o t h e C o u r t d a t e d F e b r u a r y 15, 2011, t h e D e p a r t m e n t ... r e p o r t e d t h a t h e r p r o g r e s s was o n l y ' f a i r . ' U p o n c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t h e same, i t is, therefore, "ORDERED, ADJUDGED, a n d DECREED B Y THE COURT that the legal and p h y s i c a l c u s t o d y o f [ E . C . J . ] s h a l l remain w i t h the Department " I T I S FURTHER ORDERED B Y THE COURT t h a t t h e Court r e t a i n s j u r i s d i c t i o n over [ E . C . J . ] and t h i s m a t t e r p u r s u a n t t o § 1 2 - 1 5 - 4 1 2 , Code o f A l a b a m a (19 7 5 ) . " (Capitalization in department i t s notice filed original.) of On April 8, 2011, the appeal. Discussion On a p p e a l , erred that the department argues that i n retaining jurisdiction the legal department over the juvenile E.C.J. court and i n o r d e r i n g and p h y s i c a l c u s t o d y o f E.C.J. remain w i t h t h e after E.C.J. reached 4 t h e age o f m a j o r i t y . 2100682 " ' J u v e n i l e c o u r t s are p u r e l y c r e a t u r e s of s t a t u t e t h a t h a v e e x t r e m e l y l i m i t e d j u r i s d i c t i o n . ' L.B. v . R . L . B . , 53 So. 3 d 9 6 9 , 972 ( A l a . C i v . A p p . 2 0 1 0 ) . A j u v e n i l e c o u r t ' s j u r i s d i c t i o n t o a c t e x t e n d s o n l y so far as a u t h o r i z e d by t h e e x p l i c i t terms of the e m p o w e r i n g s t a t u t e . See E x p a r t e K . L . P . , 868 So. 2 d 454, 456 ( A l a . C i v . App. 2003). Therefore, the q u e s t i o n w h e t h e r a j u v e n i l e c o u r t has a c t e d w i t h i n i t s p r o p e r b o u n d s d e p e n d s on t h e m e a n i n g o f t h e s t a t u t e b e s t o w i n g j u r i s d i c t i o n . See i d . D i s c e r n i n g the meaning of a j u r i s d i c t i o n a l s t a t u t e i n v o l v e s a p u r e q u e s t i o n o f l a w , w h i c h t h i s c o u r t r e v i e w s de n o v o . See J.W. v . C.B., 68 So. 3d 878 , 87 9 ( A l a . C i v . App. 2011)." Montgomery 2100290, Cnty. June Dep't 24, of Human 2011] So. Res. 3d v. McDermott, , [Ms. (Ala. Civ. App. 12-15-115(a)(3), A l a . Code 2011). As 1975, Ala. part, the department a part Code the "[p]roceedings (Emphasis § 12-15-101 for added.) or c h i l d jurisdiction child is original in et j u v e n i l e court the seq., will Further, § provides, exercise commitment p a r t of the A c t , p r o v i d e s : minor § of the Alabama J u v e n i l e J u s t i c e Act 1975, that argues, of a 12-15-412, "The the the minor jurisdiction minor custody commitment." of the (Emphasis 5 so long department added.) or A l a . Code j u v e n i l e court or c h i l d Act"), in pertinent shall as in child." 1975, committing to the custody of the department over ("the a any retain the minor regarding or the 2100682 Section defines Act, age 1 2 - 1 5 - 1 0 2 ( 3 ) , A l a . Code 1975, a of 18 juvenile years, court individual's as and who i s not We agree a juvenile time with court 3d order To under a individual a child the hold juvenile did child" Section who the age the meaning of by department the before of this that 19 by the years was no 12-15-102, the over her at otherwise would court enter may to s t a t u t e , see juvenile court's the note that a judgment in somewhat a binding of an commitment age holding of that 19. a commitment adult. have contexts. 6 the mental-health jurisdictions different to the McDermott, 2009, reached tantamount treatment other J u l y 10, when E . C . J . be the judgment. a s s e r t s , because empowering a chapter." E.C.J. § jurisdiction 2011, before age because defined 25, the 12-15-102(18) d e f i n e s that, as and arising i s under retain March of the under individual matter w i t h i n the not the , the relating results years department or as court at We 21 "[a]n delinquency necessarily expired order include of e x t e n d f u r t h e r t h a n the j u r i s d i c t i o n b e s t o w e d upon juvenile So. to birthday." "minor i t entered not for "[a]n Moreover, may or 18th "minor" longer "child" also a part reached See, e.g., similar In re 2100682 Appeal, 377 , i n Maricopa 604 P.2d regarding a majority and County (1979) 641 Juvenile (holding juvenile any commitment provision of No. J-86509, that any terminates the Ariz. jurisdiction at statute 124 t h e age extending of that a u t h o r i t y b e y o n d t h a t a g e was u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l ) ; I n r e C a r s o n , 84 Wash. 2 d 9 6 9 , 530 P . 2 d 331 declare that judgment of wardship e x p i r e d upon ward's r e a c h i n g that juvenile judgment upon acknowledge may attaining that some exercise majority, those language extending courts D., 52 C o n n . S u p e r . probation "child" age have concluded as p e r s o n on who that specific has v i o l a t e d 7 a juvenile age o f statutory of j u v e n i l e Cassidy (because statute a proceeding, although we v. t o impose commitment o r d e r order exhausted the state's (2010) and Although See, e.g., S t a t e i n juvenile-delinquency who v i o l a t e d p r i o r p r o b a t i o n minors of the j u r i s d i c t i o n A.2d court determined was majority). situations. 132, court only of a l lrelied t h e scope over beyond o f ward t o by j u v e n i l e when j u r i s d i c t i o n jurisdiction retained jurisdiction entered jurisdiction courts courts i n specific defined had (upon m o t i o n age o f m a j o r i t y , necessarily expired ward's court court (1975) condition juvenile of court on i n d i v i d u a l the i n d i v i d u a l had 2100682 attained age o f m a j o r i t y ) ; In re Pittman, 315 S o . 2 d 62 ( L a . C t . App. 1975) ( h o l d i n g t h a t j u v e n i l e commitment expire upon majority, because commitment that juvenile's orders statute could the l e g i s l a t u r e mental-health reaching until could amend orders however, our l e g i s l a t u r e a juvenile court's continuing commitment on Unless that and u n t i l minority continuing The 2009, and commitment reaching we of conditioned mental-health the patient. an i n t e n t the j u v e n i l e that a court's juvenile court's automatically expires order court erred a new upon t h e i n holding when i t entered that beyond E.C.J.'s judgment extending i t s j u r i s d i c t i o n . jurisdiction hold remained i n e f f e c t i n entering the state's language to state not a f f e c t juvenile t h e age o f m a j o r i t y . juvenile order does jurisdiction, mental-health child's status that over status that statute to that has s p e c i f i c a l l y the minority i t changes a specific jurisdiction of We h a v e no d o u b t t o extend beyond effect; age provided the Act to allow age o f m a j o r i t y b y e n a c t i n g d i d not state's age 2 1 ) . general orders 18, specifically last commitment age order on M a r c h i t sJuly 19th birthday 25, 2011, expressly Because the j u v e n i l e court the March 8 10, lacked 25, 2011, judgment, 2100682 that judgment 2011] is i s void. So. 3d , Owens, 51 Accordingly, So. we instructions judgment. We Program 3d the L.P., also 364, the filed In regarding the continuing the custody court merits Alabama ADAP of continue the the has the juvenile of with court 21, void E.C.J. would 2010] 9 Advocacy a s an court's amicus issues judgment to the department Even consider So. have jurisdiction a r e moot. not which B e c a u s e we lacked not r a i s e d by t h e p a r t i e s t o t h i s May i t s several case. t h e y were 1071453, with the department, were [Ms. we court juvenile i t s j u d g m e n t , ADAP's a r g u m e n t s n o t moot, 2010). albeit vacate raised arguments Roy, court Owens App. Disabilities to this of E.C.J. commitment 19, . a brief i t s brief, that Aug. "This Civ. to not r a i s e d by t h e p a r t i e s t o t h i s determined enter (Ala. 3d a t that ("ADAP") h a s 2011). the department's appeal, juvenile curiae. were 367 So. note [Ms. 2 1 0 0 5 3 5 , an a p p e a l f r o m a v o i d j u d g m e n t . " dismiss to v . A.W., ( A l a . C i v . App. required to dismiss v. L.P. them case. 3d or to to i f those because S u t t l e s v. , (Ala. 2100682 2011) the ("[A]rguments r a i s e d by a m i c i p a r t i e s t o the case are not considered APPEAL D I S M I S S E D WITH Bryan, and n o t argued by t h i s by Court."). J . , concurs. Thomas, J . , c o n c u r s Thompson, J., curiae INSTRUCTIONS. specially. P.J., dissents, joins. 10 with writing, which Pittman, 2100682 THOMAS, J u d g e , I enter agree that the specially. juvenile court a judgment r e l a t i n g to the a f t e r she the concurring reached the age c o n c e r n e x p r e s s e d by expiration of the majority age of a t h a t p e r s o n -that a 19th satisfied continued no jurisdiction j u v e n i l e commitment of of majority. P r e s i d i n g J u d g e T h o m p s o n -- might be d i s r u p t i v e to the birthday. I write that mental-health without must specially care disruption a p p l i c a t i o n of the law governing necessarily to reaching of conclusion expire note necessary upon that f o r such a person when the treatment I must a l s o c o n c u r i n the m a j o r i t y ' s commitment share that a minor's to E.C.J. Although I, too, j u v e n i l e commitment upon juvenile minor's had a I am could be under the the i n v o l u n t a r y commitment of adults. Because the p r o b a t e c o u r t does not have j u r i s d i c t i o n the commitment of 2 2 - 5 2 - 1 6 , no minors petition c o u l d have been f i l e d her reaching w o u l d be Health age released because of 19. c h i l d r e n , see Ala. seeking to continue E.C.J.'s i n the probate court That from the the or does create Code over 1975, § commitment i n a n t i c i p a t i o n of that E.C.J. custody of the Department of Mental e x p i r a t i o n of 11 her a risk juvenile commitment. 2100682 However, a p e t i t i o n in the that probate t o recommit the Department requested t h a t E.C.J. the probate court. a remain outcome commitment c o u l d have been c o u r t i m m e d i a t e l y upon h e r petition, pending E.C.J. See of the of Mental birthday; Health could in have i n a mental-health-care f a c i l i t y final commitment A l a . Code 1975, petitioner 19th filed to hearing i n § 22-52-7(a) request that the the (permitting probate court p l a c e l i m i t a t i o n s on a c o m m i t m e n t r e s p o n d e n t ' s l i b e r t y pending the If outcome of probate court liberty were herself or could were final others, E.C.J. hearing convinced warranted to order the to that because see be § on the petition). limitations she on presented 22-52-7(b), detained "at the a a the E.C.J.'s danger probate designated to court mental h e a l t h f a c i l i t y or h o s p i t a l , " § 22-52-7(a), pending a probable cause h e a r i n g t o be h e l d w i t h i n 52-8(a), and, potentially, commitment p e t i t i o n , days of s e r v i c e The minimize because he until provided potential o r she has the i s required of the p e t i t i o n . procedures the which 7 d a y s , A l a . Code 1975, f o r the hearing t o be § 22-52-8(a) in the release t u r n e d 19, w h i c h , 12 final held a on 22the within 30 & (b). commitment of § statutes patient at least i n my merely mind, 2100682 is t h e most t r o u b l i n g commitment o r d e r . in the record E.C.J.'s on appeal, I think i n the should s t a t u s quo c o u l d be m a i n t a i n e d . majority i t i s be probate opinion. 13 of a juvenile of the l i m i t e d materials Health could present liberty commitment h e a r i n g of the e x p i r a t i o n B a s e d on a r e v i e w Department of Mental that aspect likely sufficient restrained court that evidence pending and, t h u s , the a that the A c c o r d i n g l y , I concur i n the 2100682 THOMPSON, P r e s i d i n g Judge, dissenting. I agree t h a t t h e j u v e n i l e c o u r t d i d n o t have to enter a new judgment i n this matter jurisdiction on M a r c h 25, 2011, b e c a u s e , b y t h a t d a t e , E.C.J. h a d r e a c h e d t h e age o f m a j o r i t y ; however, I do n o t b e l i e v e of 10, July E.C.J. "expired" It to 2009, ordering 10, 2009, and p h y s i c a l of Mental Health commitment i n which custody of County ("the d e p a r t m e n t " ) . Department i n v o l u n t a r i l y committed William D. Tuscaloosa. seeking to release was guardian E.C.J. the motion from litem Center i t s custody. on A p r i l 3, filed commitment. another On J u l y 14 was was a by t h e she was and then a d m i t t e d t o 18, 2009, t h e d e p a r t m e n t E.C.J. filed Resources, t o the department returned to her parents. ad involuntary Human Partlow Developmental On M a r c h granted of E.C.J. o f t h e Alabama w h e n , o n F e b r u a r y 6, 2 0 0 9 , u p o n a p e t i t i o n Limestone E.C.J. judgment r e a c h e d t h e age o f m a j o r i t y . of July to the legal Department court court's i sundisputed that the juvenile court had j u r i s d i c t i o n committed the the juvenile the involuntary when E . C . J . e n t e r t h e judgment minor that 2009, filed a motion The juvenile and custody o f I n May petition ("Partlow") i n 2009, E.C.J.'s seeking E.C.J.'s 10, 2009, t h e j u v e n i l e court 2100682 granted the p e t i t i o n of the guardian a d l i t e m on t h e g r o u n d t h a t E . C . J . was s u f f e r i n g f r o m m e n t a l i l l n e s s and i n t e l l e c t u a l disability. E.C.J.'s 1 9 t h b i r t h d a y 4, 2011, i n a n t i c i p a t i o n department filed Involuntary Mental a pursuant t o §§ department have E.C.J. notice, not 19th birthday, of Expiration the 12-15-409 commitment l i f t e d , E.C.J.'s Commitment which, did of "Notice Mental Health," was F e b r u a r y 6, 2 0 1 1 . On F e b r u a r y of Juvenile t o t h e Alabama department to have Court Department asserts, a n d - 4 1 0 , A l a . Code seek E.C.J.'s from the department the department's asked the juvenile made 1975. The involuntary custody. or to In court "to acknowledge with i t s r u l i n g , the Department's l e g a l a s s e r t i o n t h a t i t s ORDER d a t e d J u l y 1 0 , 2 0 0 9 , c o m m i t t i n g [ E . C . J . ] t o [ t h e d e p a r t m e n t ] on t h e b a s i s t h a t she i s b o t h m e n t a l l y i l l and m e n t a l l y retarded, i s d u e t o e x p i r e on F e b r u a r y 6, 2 0 1 1 , u p o n t h e m i n o r r e a c h i n g h e r a g e o f m a j o r i t y , i . e . 19 y e a r s o f a g e . F u r t h e r , t h e D e p a r t m e n t r e q u e s t s g u i d a n c e on w h e t h e r [the j u v e n i l e c o u r t ] d e s i r e s f o r [E.C.J.] t o remain at Partlow (as i s c u r r e n t l y recommended by h e r treatment p r o f e s s i o n a l s ) by v i r t u e o f l e g a l custody v e s t i n g i n [ t h e D e p a r t m e n t o f Human R e s o u r c e s ] o r otherwise, v i a delinquency, dependency, c h i l d i n n e e d o f s u p e r v i s i o n , e t c . ... , t h a t may h a v e a r i s e n with [the j u v e n i l e court] before the minor's 18th birthday." 15 of was t o end E.C.J.'s treatment a t Partlow, removed the i t s 2100682 A hearing was held age of on reaching the juvenile court physical custody of E.C.J. the majority, entered issues and on i t s judgment was March the timely matter pursuant appealed to this The department commitments e x p i r e argument, statutes the to illness "minor or that emphasizes The department 1975, which states, that juvenile court will exercise commitment of (Emphasis i n department's appellate governing the discharge 12-15-411, mentally custody, retarded as minor and department department "mental from several or c h i l d r e n r e t a r d a t i o n , h i g h l i g h t i n g the i n each. f o r the legal In support of i t s of minors A l a . Code "'[p]roceedings the jurisdiction The language 115(a)(3), the 2011, the j u v e n i l e court's a t t h e age o f m a j o r i t y . " department child" retaining E.C.J.'s court. argues or mental the 12-15-412. g o v e r n i n g t h e commitment mental 25, to remain with § to d i r e c t i n g that a n d s t a t i n g t h a t t h e j u v e n i l e c o u r t was over related or child a a from § words 12-15- in pertinent minor or I t also quotes mentally the minor or c h i l d committed d e p a r t m e n t who has g a i n e d 16 in child.'" i l l or § a department's follows: "'(a) Any custody of the part, jurisdiction brief.) of quotes with to the maximum 2100682 benefit from i n s t i t u t i o n a l t r e a t m e n t , who i s no l o n g e r i n need of the s e r v i c e s of the department, or who h a s g a i n e d maximum b e n e f i t f r o m t h e p r o g r a m s o f t h e d e p a r t m e n t s h a l l be d i s c h a r g e d f r o m t h e c u s t o d y o f t h e d e p a r t m e n t . The m i n o r o r c h i l d s h a l l n o t be r e c e i v e d a g a i n by t h e d e p a r t m e n t p u r s u a n t t o t h e o r i g i n a l commitment o r d e r u n l e s s deemed a p p r o p r i a t e by a court of proper jurisdiction holding a subsequent hearing. "'(b) The d e p a r t m e n t s h a l l n o t i f y t h e c o m m i t t i n g j u v e n i l e court or the court to which the case i s t r a n s f e r r e d and t h e p a r t i e s t o t h e commitment a c t i o n i n w r i t i n g , w h i c h m u s t be r e c e i v e d b y t h e j u v e n i l e c o u r t a t l e a s t 10 d a y s i n a d v a n c e o f t h e p r o p o s e d d i s c h a r g e . The c o m m i t t i n g j u v e n i l e c o u r t , a t t h e time of d i s c h a r g e , shall transfer custody to a p e r s o n o r a n o t h e r s t a t e d e p a r t m e n t o r a g e n c y deemed s u i t a b l e by t h e j u v e n i l e c o u r t . ' " (Emphasis i n department's appellate brief.) The department also quotes the b a s i s f o r the j u v e n i l e court's h o l d i n g that i t retained jurisdiction states: "'The over this matter, § 12-15-412, j u v e n i l e c o u r t c o m m i t t i n g any m i n o r o r c h i l d the custody of the department the minor or child so long shall as retain the minor jurisdiction or child custody of the department r e g a r d i n g the o r i g i n a l (Emphasis In mentally the i n department's addition i l l which to appellate statutes department cites general 17 to disabled statutes over i s i n the commitment.'" brief.) relating or i n t e l l e c t u a l l y to the minors defining commitment and of children, a minor as one 2100682 who i s under t h e age 102(18) and 26-1-1 o f 19 y e a r s , App. 1985). In re Warrick, Warrick o f t h e department were juvenile court's certain order pending The s t a t u t e s i n e f f e c t of the department this case, which case court remains in held to by the the department the department discharge the c h i l d . i t is court i n Warrick in "[o]nce the that relieved or In until custody of that the child the Warrick court n o t be r e l i e v e d o f i t s l e g a l Id. improperly of the j u v e n i l e Accordingly, had taken I d . a t 1228. 18 in a I d . a t 1227. "except by o r d e r of time." the I d . a t 1225. language Therefore, could to the c h i l d or the passage that Id. to to the department, until juvenile i t s majority." responsibility court department child a as t o t h e a u t h o r i t y concluded t r a n s f e r s custody the responsibility that a a patient. court whether for violating orders. i n 1984 w e r e s i l e n t on issue and p l a c e m e n t ' " further court relies juvenile concluded, committed treatment to discharge in the i n contempt the department the reaches that for "'evaluation, facility 12-15- 501 S o . 2 d 1 2 2 3 ( A l a . involved employees department 1 9 7 5 , §§ ( d e f i n i n g t h e a g e o f m a j o r i t y a s 19 y e a r s ) . The d e p a r t m e n t a l s o c i t e s Civ. A l a . Code the i t upon court itself 2100682 We n o t e t h a t of majority. before i n Warrick the c h i l d M o r e o v e r , W a r r i c k was d e c i d e d m o r e t h a n 20 y e a r s the statutes relevant case were p r o m u l g a t e d . when custody of the department. or a minor discharged benefit of a child when benefit That child or discharged from the i tprovides minor "has committed "[t]he because to that court that minor so l o n g custody of the department i n that statute simply maximum treatment of a c h i l d child of or minor the shall as t h e m i n o r regarding calls because retain department or c h i l d or c h i l d 19 to over i s i n the commitment." f o r a court-ordered or provides jurisdiction the o r i g i n a l the c h i l d or a r e a c h e s t h e age c o m m i t t i n g any minor the or c h i l d c a n be § 12-15-411(a). To t h e c o n t r a r y , § 1 2 - 1 5 - 4 1 2 e x p l i c i t l y juvenile a o r ... h a s g a i n e d maximum the custody custody of the department "expire" gained that t r e a t m e n t , ... i s no l o n g e r i n n e e d the to 12-15-411 of the department of the department, simply of m a j o r i t y . Nothing § Specifically, does n o t p r o v i d e already "expires" that mentioned, c a n be i n the custody that presented i n this from the programs of the department." statute minor or a minor from i n s t i t u t i o n a l the services to the issue As p r e v i o u s l y governs child h a d n o t r e a c h e d t h e age commitment the minor who i s 2100682 r e c e i v i n g treatment pursuant to that order of h a s r e a c h e d t h e age majority. I b e l i e v e t h a t , under t r a d i t i o n a l p r i n c i p l e s of s t a t u t o r y construction, had the legislature intended for a mental c o m m i t m e n t t o " e x p i r e " when a c o m m i t t e d m i n o r r e a c h e s t h e a g e of majority, statutes governing children. 2004). i t could See Ex have included the involuntary parte Sawyer, such language commitment 8 92 So. 2d i n the of minors or 8 98 , 902 ( A l a . That the l e g i s l a t u r e d i d not i n c l u d e i n i t s statutory s c h e m e an " e x p i r a t i o n " o f a c o m m i t m e n t o r d e r upon t h e m i n o r ' s reaching for a t h e age validly of m a j o r i t y entered e.g., Ex (Ala. 1993) unius est exclusio the parte on any ("[C]ourts exclusion In f a c t , State commitment Dep't often alterius of another) treatment that i t d i d not order to of Revenue, 624 apply So. 2d t h e l e g a l maxim (the expression intend "expire." See, 582 , 584 expressio o f one thing i s in interpreting statutes."). an e x p i r a t i o n o f a commitment o r d e r t h e age o f t h e p e r s o n other implies being treated based s o l e l y f o r mental illness or mental d i s a b i l i t y may b e d i s r u p t i v e t o t h e c a r e and of that Furthermore, a new the course of treatment that has person. commitment p r o c e e d i n g d u r i n g 20 to require 2100682 already o r d e r e d by treated being been reaches judicial Assume resources. that, becomes a department one a the to i s awarded age merely because the of majority is scenario comes to mind. birthday, a minor before himself his or 19th to others a person following The week danger court waste such that custody of the minor pursuant to a o r d e r o f i n v o l u n t a r y commitment e n t e r e d by t h e j u v e n i l e Under age the department's of m a j o r i t y must be custody In only rationale, a week carried out later, again, of the department this the progress recommending her entire although the i n her person for release from and in i t was not Indeed, that the As l o n g as We or a minor has been the custody of the child department or the minor department, "shall pursuant to the not § order. discharged from 12-15-411(a) provides that be again original 21 E.C.J. there i s court to enter a d u p l i c a t i v e a child the made s i m p l y no r e a s o n f o r a new once the has r e m a i n s c o m m i t t e d p u r s u a n t t o t h e o r d e r o f J u l y 2009, note that court. judgment. i t s custody. department wishes her to remain at Partlow. valid process is admits that E.C.J. treatment the reaches commitment pursuant to a v a l i d case, the department "fair" when t h e m i n o r of received commitment order by the unless 2100682 deemed a p p r o p r i a t e by a c o u r t to jurisdiction holding That p r o v i s i o n o f § 12-15-411 a subsequent hearing." of proper appears contemplate the f o l l o w i n g scenario: intellectually custody disabled minor of the department has when a m e n t a l l y been committed and i s s u b s e q u e n t l y t h a t m i n o r h a s r e a c h e d t h e age o f m a j o r i t y , court cannot order must be o r d e r e d reached subsequent by a c o u r t with to f i l e judgment. aside Ala. has r e v e a l e d a "Notice The p r o p e r i s f o ra party R. it t h e commitment o v e r o n e who h a s would authorize of E x p i r a t i o n " of a v a l i d l y to f i l e t o have entered a judgment s e t a motion pursuant to Rule allows f o r judgments 60(b), t o be s e t a s i d e The d e p a r t m e n t d i d n o t make a n y t o have t h e judgment i n t h i s gave t h e department and any l a w - - t h a t method by which C i v . P., w h i c h unilaterally July commitment; no l a w - - a n d under c e r t a i n circumstances. effort released, i f then the j u v e n i l e jurisdiction main o p i n i o n have n o t c i t e d a party to the t h e age o f m a j o r i t y . My r e s e a r c h the a i l l or case s e t a s i d e . "notice" to the j u v e n i l e court Instead, that the 2009 j u d g m e n t h a d " e x p i r e d . " I believe effective until that the E.C.J. July has 2009 gained 22 judgment maximum will benefit remain from 2100682 institutional of the programs treatment, department, or i s no has of the department. must r e s p e c t f u l l y gained See dissent. Pittman, l o n g e r i n need concurs. J., 23 maximum § of the benefit 12-15-411. services from the Therefore, I

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.