Kappers v. DeKalb County Bd. of Health
Decision Date | 25 July 1994 |
Docket Number | No. A94A1876,A94A1876 |
Citation | 446 S.E.2d 794,214 Ga.App. 117 |
Parties | KAPPERS v. DeKALB COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH. |
Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Milton D. Rowan, Rose H. Nathan, Gerald R. Weber, Jr., for appellant.
Jonathan A. Weintraub, Lisa F. Stuckey, Joan F. Roach, for appellee.
The DeKalb County Board of Health ("the Board") filed a petition pursuant to OCGA § 31-14-2 for the isolation and involuntary outpatient treatment of John Kappers (defendant), alleging defendant has contagious tuberculosis but refuses to comply with a treatment plan promulgated by the Board. After a hearing, the trial court determined that defendant "is conducting himself so as to expose other persons to danger of infection of tuberculosis, after having been directed by the Board to comply with treatment..." and that his "actions constitute a danger to himself and to the public health...." The trial court ordered defendant to comply with the Board's plan of treatment. This treatment included immediate respiratory isolation, which "means that [defendant] should not leave the immediate area of [his] home except as required for medical care directed by [his] physician." Also, the plan directed defendant to wear a particulate respirator mask while in the presence of others. Respiratory isolation would continue "until [his] sputum cultures are consistently negative for Mycobacterium tuberculosis and a reevaluation determines that [he] no longer [has] infectious tuberculosis." Defendant appealed the trial court's order to the Supreme Court of Georgia which transferred the case to the Court of Appeals. Held:
The Board has filed a motion in this court to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the issues raised by the grant of the Board's petition for involuntary isolation and treatment have been rendered moot. ' (Emphasis in original.) Chastain v. Baker, 255 Ga. 432, 433, 339 S.E.2d 241. An appellate court has a right to hear and consider evidence outside of the record as transmitted from the court below that an appeal is moot. The Atlanta & Fla. R. Co. v. Blanton, 80 Ga. 563, 565(1), 6 S.E. 584. Where, Tuells v. Torras, 113 Ga. 691, 692(1), 693, 39 S.E. 455. Stipulations in brief or in open court as to the existence of facts indicating mootness are treated as solemn admissions in judicio. Froelich v. State, 210 Ga.App. 647, 648, fn. 1, 437 S.E.2d 358.
In the case sub judice, the Board submitted the affidavit of Lawrence L. Sanders M.D., the Deputy Director of the DeKalb County Board of Health. Dr. Sanders deposed that on May 17, 1994, the Board received the third consecutive negative culture of defendant's sputum and on May 18, 1994, he informed defendant that the respiratory isolation previously imposed was ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
I.B., In Interest of
...Comm., 212 Ga.App. 575, 577(1), 442 S.E.2d 860 (1994); Hutchinson, supra at 187(1), 429 S.E.2d 661; Kappers v. DeKalb County Bd. of Health, 214 Ga.App. 117, 118, 446 S.E.2d 794 (1994). On the other hand, in R.W. Page Corp., supra at 578(1), 292 S.E.2d 815, the Court did not separate the ini......
-
Cardinale v. State
...has not shown that the alleged error is capable of repetition but will evade judicial review. See Kappers v. DeKalb County Bd. of Health , 214 Ga. App. 117, 118, 446 S.E.2d 794 (1994) (once Board lifted order confining tuberculosis patient to home, challenge to Board's order was moot); comp......
-
McWhorter v. Greene
...court's judgment is of no practical benefit to the parties, any issues raised on appeal are rendered moot. Kappers v. DeKalb County Bd. of Health, 214 Ga.App. 117, 446 S.E.2d 794. In the cases sub judice, defendants do not challenge the trial court's determination that the restrictive coven......
-
Cardinale v. State
...implicates the court's jurisdiction, we are not limited to accepting as true the pleadings as set forth in the complaint. See Kappers, 214 Ga.App. at 118 ("An court has a right to hear and consider evidence outside of the record as transmitted from the court below that an appeal is moot.") ......