Johnson v. Schoch

• Decision Date: 11 November 1911
• Docket Number: 17,726
• Citation: 118 P. 696,85 Kan. 837
• Parties: SWAN JOHNSON, Plaintiff, v. W. F. SCHOCH, as Probate Judge, etc., Defendant
• Court: Kansas Supreme Court

118 P. 696

85 Kan. 837

SWAN JOHNSON, Plaintiff, v. W. F. SCHOCH, as Probate Judge, etc., Defendant

No. 17,726

Supreme Court of Kansas

November 11, 1911

Decided July, 1911.

Original proceeding in mandamus.

Mandamus denied.

SYLLABUS

SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.

1. INSANE PERSONS--Discharged from Hospital--Rights of Citizenship. A person adjudged to be insane and committed to a state hospital for the insane, who was afterward discharged from the hospital as improved, is not, by reason of such discharge, entitled to the entry of an order restoring him to his rights as a citizen.

2. INSANE PERSONS--Same. Only such patients as have been discharged from the hospital as cured, or are not insane, are entitled to an order of restoration.

3. INSANE PERSONS--Same. The term "discharged as improved" is not the equivalent of "discharged as cured" within the meaning of the latter term as used in section 8484 of the General Statutes of 1909.

John F. Hanson, for the plaintiff.

E. R. Simon, county attorney, for the defendant.

OPINION

JOHNSTON, C. J.:

The question involved in this proceeding is whether a person who has been adjudged to be insane and committed to a hospital for the insane, and who was afterwards discharged from the institution as improved, is entitled to the entry of an order restoring him to all his rights as a citizen and the removal of a guardian appointed to care for him and his property.

It appears that Swan Johnson was adjudged to be insane and a fit person to be sent to the hospital established for the treatment of the insane. A guardian was appointed and placed in charge of Johnson's property, which was estimated to be worth $ 2000. Later Johnson was temporarily released on parole, pending a proceeding in which the probate court was asked to find and declare that he had been restored to his sanity and to order his discharge. Upon the hearing the application for an order of restoration was denied and he was remanded to custody in the state hospital. Two months later the superintendent of the hospital sent a notice to the probate judge "that Swan Johnson, a patient from your county, was, on the first day of June, 1911, discharged from this institution as improved." Shortly afterward counsel for Johnson appeared in the probate court and asked for an order restoring Johnson to his rights as a citizen, and, the order being refused, this proceeding was brought to compel the making and entry of such an order.

There is no controversy here as to the facts nor about the present mental condition of the plaintiff, but his contention is that on the face of the record he is entitled to the order asked for, and he argues that under the statute a discharge from the hospital "as improved" is the equivalent of a discharge "as cured." The statute provides:

"When notice shall be given to the probate judge of any county that a patient committed to any hospital in the state upon order of said court has been discharged as cured, under [upon] receipt of such notice, signed by the superintendent, whose duty it shall be to give notice of every such case, the probate judge shall enter upon his docket an order restoring the patient in question to all his rights as a citizen, and if a guardian shall have been appointed, said guardian shall be removed. At any time subsequent to the discharge of the patient as not restored to sound mind, the probate judge of the county may hear evidence tending to show that such patient has been restored to reason, and if satisfied as to his recovery, may make and enter a similar order; and...