In the Interest of E.T., 20000248
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of North Dakota |
| Citation | 617 N.W.2d 470,2000 ND 174 |
| Docket Number | 20000248 |
| Parties | In the Interest of E.T. Patrick B. Goodman, M.D., Petitioner and Appellee v. E.T., Respondent and Appellant2000 ND 174 IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA Filed |
| Decision Date | 03 October 2000 |
In the Interest of E.T. Patrick B. Goodman, M.D., Petitioner and Appellee
v.
E.T., Respondent and Appellant
No. 20000248
2000 ND 174
IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
Filed 10/3/00 by Clerk of Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of Morton County, South Central Judicial District, the Honorable Thomas J. Schneider, Judge.
DISMISSED.
Opinion of the Court by Maring, Justice.
Gregory I. Runge, 418 E. Rosser Avenue, Suite A, Bismarck, N.D. 58501, for respondent and appellant.
Brian D. Grosinger, Assistant State's Attorney, 210 2nd Avenue NW, Mandan, N.D. 58554, for petitioner and appellee.
Maring, Justice.
[1] E.T. appeals an involuntary medication order, authorizing hospital physicians to treat E.T. with a feeding tube for the purpose of providing her with nourishment. We conclude this appeal is moot and dismiss.
[2] On August 4, 2000, a petition was filed for the involuntary commitment of E.T. due to her alleged mental illness. On August 8, 2000, the trial court ordered E.T. hospitalized and treated. On August 10, 2000, the State filed a motion for an order to treat E.T. with medication. Following a hearing on the matter, the trial court issued its order permitting involuntary treatment with medication on August 14, 2000. Neither of these two orders are the subject of this appeal.
[3] On August 28, 2000, the State filed a second motion for an order to treat E.T. with medication. The motion was made under N.D.C.C. 25-03.1-18.1.(FN1) The request was to involuntarily tube feed E.T. with a nutritional supplement, known as Jevity Plus. Upon conclusion of the evidence at the hearing on August 31, 2000, the trial court granted the State's motion for involuntary medication.
[4] On September 11, 2000, the State filed a motion with this Court to dismiss the case. In its motion, the State indicated that E.T. had been released from the hospital and that due to recent improvements in E.T.'s health, a feeding tube was no longer necessary. E.T. filed a response to the State's motion to dismiss, arguing the case should not be dismissed because the issue presented "is capable of repetition, yet evading review."
[5] We have long held that this Court will not render advisory opinions. See Nord v. Herman, 1998 ND 91, 12, 577 N.W.2d 782. An appeal will be dismissed if the issues become moot or academic such that no actual controversy is left to be determined. See Ashley Education Ass'n v. Ashley Public School District, 556 N.W.2d 666...
To continue reading
Request your trial
11 cases
-
Yancy v. Shatzer
...has a "duty" to address an otherwise moot case when the "question involved is a matter of public interest"). North Dakota: In re E.T., 2000 ND 174, P5, 617 N.W.2d 470, 617 N.W.2d 470, 471 (2000) ("[I]ssues characterized as moot will nonetheless be heard by this court if the controversy is c......
-
GUARDIANSHIP/CONSERVATORSHIP OF VAN SICKLE, No. 20040195
...2005 ND 39, ¶ 8, 692 N.W.2d 128. An appeal will be dismissed as moot if no actual controversy is left to be determined. In re E.T., 2000 ND 174, ¶ 5, 617 N.W.2d 470. No actual controversy exists if certain events have occurred which make it impossible for this Court to issue relief, or when......
-
DeCoteau v. Nodak Mut. Ins. Co., 20010066.
...by a lapse of time, or the occurrence of related events which make it impossible for a court to grant effective relief. See In re E.T., 2000 ND 174, ¶ 5, 617 N.W.2d 470. Ordinarily, the parties' mutual satisfaction of judgment, in which DeCoteau received all that he sought from Nodak with r......
-
In re Estate of Shubert v. Novak, 20120276.
...and will dismiss an appeal as moot if the issues become academic and there is no actual controversy left to be determined. In re E.T., 2000 ND 174, ¶ 5, 617 N.W.2d 470. No actual controversy exists if subsequent events make it impossible for a court to provide effective relief, or if the la......
Request a trial to view additional results