Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: the INVOLUNTARY COMMITMENT OF Frederick T. SKELTON III.
Frederick T. Skelton III (“the respondent”) appeals from a judgment of the Jefferson County Probate Court entered on April 24, 2000, committing him to the custody of the State Department of Mental Health and Mental Retardation for inpatient treatment of a mental illness at a state hospital. The sole issue raised by the respondent, through his guardian ad litem, concerns whether the probate court's commitment order was supported by clear and convincing evidence. However, according to the brief filed by the advocate for the State, the respondent was released from state custody on May 26, 2000. The respondent has not filed a reply brief disputing the State's statements.
The general rule is that if, pending an appeal, an event occurs that makes determination of the case unnecessary, the appeal will be dismissed; however, an exception applies in situations in which, if no decision of the question is made on appeal, the collateral rights of the parties dependent upon its decision will be left undetermined. Adams v. Warden, 422 So.2d 787, 790 (Ala.Civ.App.1982). The respondent's release makes it unnecessary for this court to determine whether the probate court's judgment of commitment was supported by clear and convincing evidence, and we are not aware of any collateral rights that remain to be determined by this court-the costs of the commitment proceeding, including fees for the respondent's guardian ad litem and for the State's advocate, were taxed by the probate court to the State, rather than to the respondent. See § 22-52-14, Ala.Code 1975. Under these circumstances, the respondent's appeal is due to be dismissed as moot. Accord, In re Woodruff, 567 N.W.2d 226 (S.D.1997).
APPEAL DISMISSED.
ROBERTSON, Presiding Judge.
YATES, MONROE, CRAWLEY, and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: 2990806.
Decided: August 25, 2000
Court: Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)