Citation network
Parham Vs. J.R.
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 20, 1979
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 584 (1979) U.S. Supreme Court Parham v. J.RSearch
-
U.S. 584 (1979) Parham v. J.RSearch
-
fiscal and administrative burden that the additional or substitute procedural requirement would entail. Cf. Mathews v. EldridgeSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Smith v. OrganizationSearch
-
retain plenary authority to seek such care for their children, subject to an independent medical judgment. Cf. Pierce v. SocietySearch
-
U. S. 390 . Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. DanforthSearch
-
to determine whether the statutory requirements for admission are satisfied, see Goldberg v. KellySearch
-
statutory scheme was unconstitutional because it failed to protect adequately the appellees' due process rights. J. L. v. ParhamSearch
-
U.S. 936, and heard argument during the 1977 Term. The case was then consolidated with Secretary of Public Welfare v. InstitutionalizedSearch
-
U. S. 319 , 424 U. S. 335 (1976), quoted in Smith v. OrganizationSearch
-
state's involvement in the commitment decision constitutes state action under the Fourteenth Amendment. See Addington v. TexasSearch
-
the child because of the reaction of some to the discovery that the child has received psychiatric care. Cf. Addington v. TexasSearch
-
is the symptomatology of a mental or emotional illness. Addington v. TexasSearch
-
Pierce v. SocietySearch
-
of Sisters, 268 U. S. 510 , 268 U. S. 535 (1925). See also Wisconsin v. YoderSearch
-
as was stated in Bartley v. KremensSearch
-
over parental discretion in dealing with children when their physical or mental health is jeopardized. See Wisconsin v. YoderSearch
-
parents an absolute veto over a minor child's decision to have an abortion. Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. DanforthSearch
-
instance of bad faith by any parent of any member of appellees' class. We cannot assume that the result in Meyer v. NebraskaSearch
-
supra, and Pierce v. SocietySearch
-
voluntary commitments. Addington v. TexasSearch
-
U.S. at 441 U. S. 430 . See also Mathews v. EldridgeSearch
-
that the neutral and detached trier of fact be law trained or a judicial or administrative officer. See Goldberg v. KellySearch
-
Board of Curators of Univ. of Missouri v. HorowitzSearch
-
U. S. 78 , 435 U. S. 90 (1978). See also Greenholtz v. NebraskaSearch
-
Cafeteria Restaurant Workers v. McElroySearch
-
they are only a first step in the process. In an opinion for a unanimous Court, we recently stated in Addington v. TexasSearch
-
Although we acknowledge the fallibility of medical and psychiatric diagnosis, see O'Connor v. DonaldsonSearch
-
Parental Commitment of Minors to Mental Institutions, 62 Calif.L.Rev. 840, 850-851 (1974). See also J.L. v. ParhamSearch
-
admission decision, but it may have some effect on how long a child will remain in the hospital. We noted in Addington v. TexasSearch
-
U.Pa.L.Rev. 1267, 1276 (1975). See also Wheeler v. MontgomerySearch
-
as to exactly what procedures to employ whenever a traditional judicial-type hearing is mandated, compare Goss v. LopezSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Parham v. J.RSearch
-
Cf. Mathews v. EldridgeSearch
-
Cf. Pierce v. SocietySearch
-
Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. DanforthSearch
-
J. L. v. ParhamSearch
-
Secretary of Public Welfare v. InstitutionalizedSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial