Norma Jackson v. Indiana Adult Protective Services , 2016 Ind. App. LEXIS 77 ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •                                                                                       FILED
    Mar 17 2016, 7:57 am
    CLERK
    Indiana Supreme Court
    Court of Appeals
    and Tax Court
    ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT                                    ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
    Ana M. Quirk                                              Gregory F. Zoeller
    Muncie, Indiana                                           Attorney General of Indiana
    Frances Barrow
    Deputy Attorney General
    Indianapolis, Indiana
    IN THE
    COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
    Norma Jackson,                                            March 17, 2016
    Appellant-Respondent,                                     Court of Appeals Case No.
    18A02-1508-MI-1075
    v.                                                Appeal from the Delaware Circuit
    Court
    Indiana Adult Protective                                  The Honorable Linda Ralu Wolf,
    Services,                                                 Judge
    Appellee-Petitioner                                       Trial Court Cause No.
    18C03-1504-MI-44
    Mathias, Judge.
    [1]   Norma Jackson (“Jackson”) appeals a protective services order issued by the
    Delaware Circuit Court requiring her to receive twenty-four-hour care and
    supervision at a nursing facility. Jackson argues that Adult Protective Services
    (“APS”) failed to present sufficient evidence that she was an “endangered
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A02-1508-MI-1075 | March 17, 2016                           Page 1 of 18
    adult” and that a life threatening emergency existed under Indiana Code section
    12-10-3-28.
    [2]   We reverse and remand for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
    Facts and Procedural History
    [3]   On April 9, 2015, while driving, Jackson hit a small pine tree across the street
    from her home. The accident caused extensive damage to Jackson’s vehicle,
    and it was towed away by a wrecking company. Jackson was not injured in the
    accident, but she could not remember what happened to her car the next day, so
    she called the police approximately twenty times asking for its location. The
    police explained to her that it was towed by a wrecking company. Jackson was
    clearly confused by this answer, and she continued to call the police about the
    location of her car. She eventually told the police that they had no right to tow
    her car. Jackson also repeatedly asked the police if her car had been repaired.
    and they responded that she would have to contact her insurance company
    about that.
    [4]   After this incident, and because of Jackson’s repeated calls, on April 11, 2015,
    the Muncie Police Department decided to conduct a welfare check on Jackson.
    Jackson was eighty-one years old and living alone at this time.1 When the police
    arrived at her residence, Jackson would not let the officers in her home because
    1
    Jackson is now eighty-two years old.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A02-1508-MI-1075 | March 17, 2016   Page 2 of 18
    she did not know them. Through her locked screen door, the officers asked
    Jackson to name the day. Jackson responded that she did not have any need to
    keep track of the days. The officers also asked her to name the current mayor of
    Muncie, to which she responded, “Who cares.” Appellee’s App. p. 10. The
    police asked Jackson to name the current president of the United States, as well.
    Jacksons stated that she thought it was Barack Obama but was not sure if he
    was still President.
    [5]   Based on this interaction, the officers believed that Jackson would benefit from
    a psychological evaluation. After an hour of talking to Jackson through the
    screen door, a helicopter flew overhead. When Jackson stepped out onto the
    porch to look at the helicopter, officers blocked her entry back into the home.
    The officers then loaded Jackson into the ambulance, and she was taken to IU
    Health/Ball Memorial Hospital. Jackson was admitted to the Gero-Psychiatric
    Unit of Meridian Services at the hospital.
    [6]   That same day, Meridian Services submitted an application for emergency
    detention of a mentally ill and dangerous person which stated that Jackson had
    a “psychiatric disorder that substantially disturbed her thinking, feeling or
    behavior and impaired her ability to function.” Appellee’s App. p. 3. The
    application also indicated that Jackson was gravely disabled and in need of
    immediate restraint because of “increased confusion, poor tracking, substantial
    impairment in judgment/reasoning.” Id.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A02-1508-MI-1075 | March 17, 2016   Page 3 of 18
    [7]   In the corresponding physician’s statement submitted to the mental health court
    on April 15, 2015, Doctor Abdulmalek Sadehh (“Dr. Sadehh”) stated that
    Jackson was suffering from a psychiatric disorder, specifically “Dementia NOS
    [not otherwise specified] most likely Alzheimer’s type.” Id. at 6. Dr. Sadehh
    also noted that Jackson had poor short-term memory, poor insight and
    impaired judgment, and was unable to manage some personal needs such as
    driving a car, managing finances, and living safely at home. Id. Dr. Sadehh also
    recommended that Jackson be placed in the custody, care, or treatment in an
    appropriate facility and suggested placement in the Meridian Services Gero-
    Psychiatric Unit for no more than ninety-days. The medical team was
    concerned that if Jackson returned home, she would not take her medication or
    let home health workers into her house. On April 17, 2015, the court granted
    the hospital’s application, and Jackson was placed under a temporary ninety-
    day commitment.
    [8]   After Jackson was committed, Meridian Services contacted APS to assist
    placing Jackson in a nursing facility. Appellant’s App. p. 6. On April 27, 2015,
    Steve Sumner (“Sumner”) of APS filed a verified petition for emergency
    services. That same day, a hearing was held, and the trial court entered an order
    for emergency services, directing Jackson to be transported to The Woodlands
    Care Center (“The Woodlands”). The trial court scheduled a hearing on the
    petition for emergency services and to appoint a guardian ad litem and fiduciary
    conservator for May 8, 2015. After Jackson requested a continuance, a hearing
    was held on these matters on June 26, 2015.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A02-1508-MI-1075 | March 17, 2016   Page 4 of 18
    [9]    After arriving at The Woodlands, Jackson was under the care of Doctor Lynn
    Valena (“Dr. Valena”). Dr. Valena observed that Jackson was forgetful and
    needed help taking her medication. Dr. Valena believed that Jackson would
    benefit from receiving twenty-four-hour care. She also noted that Jackson was
    in relatively good physical shape. A social worker at The Woodlands, Katie
    Lucas (“Lucas”), also agreed that Jackson had cognitive issues, making her a
    good candidate for services. Lucas specifically explained that Jackson is unable
    to identify the day of the week, so she does not know when to go to work, pay
    bills, or take out the trash. Certified nursing aide at The Woodlands, Athena
    Jackson,2 would sometimes remind Jackson where her room and bathroom
    were located and worried that if Jackson was sent home that she could not
    completely take care of herself. However, Jackson brushes her teeth, bathes,
    feeds, and dresses herself without any assistance from the nursing staff.
    [10]   Jackson has no immediate family, but Jackson’s former sister-in-law, Lillian
    Pullins (“Pullins”), used to bring Jackson milk every so often. Pullins agreed
    that Jackson would not likely take her medication on her own but said that
    Jackson has done “good” over the years. Statement of Evidence p. 7.3 Pullins
    explained that when Jackson lived on her own she purchased her own
    2
    Athena Jackson is not in any way related to Norma Jackson.
    3
    Because a large portion of the transcript was “indiscernible” due to the tape recorder not containing an
    external microphone, Jackson filed a motion to certify statement of evidence on November 23, 2015. With
    no objections from APS, the trial court granted the motion the next day.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A02-1508-MI-1075 | March 17, 2016                      Page 5 of 18
    groceries, paid off the mortgage on her house, and arranged for bills to be paid
    by her bank.
    [11]   The trial court entered a protective services order on June 30, 2015, finding
    Jackson to be an endangered adult in need of protective services for twenty-
    four-hour care and supervision. The court ordered Jackson to remain at The
    Woodlands until a medical doctor determines that she is ready for discharge
    into a less restrictive environment. Jackson now appeals.
    Jackson’s Commitment
    [12]   Although Jackson appeals the trial court’s protective services order determining
    that she was an endangered adult involved in a life threatening emergency, we
    begin our analysis with Jackson’s temporary commitment.
    Civil commitment is a significant deprivation of liberty that
    requires due process protections. Because everyone exhibits some
    abnormal conduct at one time or another, loss of liberty calls for
    a showing that the individual suffers from something more
    serious than is demonstrated by idiosyncratic behavior. The
    petitioner. . . is required to prove by clear and convincing
    evidence that the individual is: (1) mentally ill and (2) either
    dangerous or gravely disabled and that (3) commitment is
    appropriate. 
    Ind. Code § 12-26-2-5
    (e). In order to carry its burden
    of proof, the petitioner is not required to prove that the individual
    is both dangerous and gravely disabled. However, there is no
    constitutional basis for confining a mentally ill person who is not
    dangerous and can live safely in freedom.
    Civil Commitment of W.S. v. Eskenazi Health, Midtown Cmty. Mental Health
    Ctr., 
    23 N.E.3d 29
    , 33 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (quoting M.L. v. Meridian
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A02-1508-MI-1075 | March 17, 2016   Page 6 of 18
    Servs., Inc., 
    956 N.E.2d 752
    , 755 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011) (quotation marks
    and some citations omitted), trans. denied.
    [13]   Although we have not reviewed the transcript of the commitment hearing, the
    emergency detention application and physician’s statement was included in the
    record to support APS’s argument. See Appellee’s App. pp. 3, 6. In its
    application for emergency detention, Meridian Services alleged that Jackson
    needed to be committed because she was mentally ill and gravely disabled. 
    Id.
    A mental illness is defined as a psychiatric disorder that substantially disturbs
    an individual’s thinking, feeling, or behavior and impairs the individual’s ability
    to function. 
    Ind. Code § 12-7-2-130
    . Dr. Sadehh indicated that Jackson was
    mentally ill and diagnosed her with dementia NOS, most likely the Alzheimer’s
    type. Further, Dr. Saddeh expressed that Jackson was gravely disabled as
    defined in Indiana Code section 12-7-2-96:
    “Gravely disabled”, for purposes of IC 12-26, means a condition
    in which an individual, as a result of mental illness is in danger of
    coming to harm because the individual:
    ***
    (2) has a substantial impairment or an obvious
    deterioration of that individual’s judgment, reasoning, or
    behavior that results in the individual’s inability to
    function independently.
    [14]   Dr. Saddeh believed that Jackson was gravely disabled under Indiana Code
    section 12-7-2-96(2) because Jackson has “poor short-term memory, poor
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A02-1508-MI-1075 | March 17, 2016     Page 7 of 18
    insight and impaired judgment, and is unable to manage some personal needs
    such as driving a car, managing finances, and living safely at home.” See
    Appellee’s App. p. 6. Again, we have not been presented with the transcript
    from the commitment hearing, but we must emphasize that there is no
    constitutional basis for confining a mentally ill person who is not dangerous
    and can live safely in freedom. See Civil Commitment of W.S, 23 N.E.3d at 33.
    [15]   After examining the evidence presented at the hearing on emergency services,
    we note that although Jackson undoubtedly suffers from cognitive impairment
    due to dementia, she is not dangerous and has been able to function safely.
    Before she was admitted to the Gero-Psychiatric Unit at Meridian Services,
    Jackson purchased her own groceries, cooked meals, bathed and dressed
    herself, brushed her teeth, took out the trash, and arranged for the bank to pay
    her bills. This same evidence might not have been presented at the commitment
    hearing, but because Jackson’s temporary commitment essentially was
    converted into an involuntary protective order, it is crucial to question whether
    Jackson’s underlying temporary commitment to the Gero-Psychiatric Unit was
    proper.
    Jackson’s “Emergency” Protective Order
    [16]   After Jackson was committed, Meridian Services contacted APS because they
    believed that Jackson needed nursing home services, which Meridian Services
    does not provide. To maneuver around the temporary commitment and provide
    Jackson with more extensive supervision and care, APS filed a verified petition
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A02-1508-MI-1075 | March 17, 2016   Page 8 of 18
    for emergency services on April 27, 2015, which the trial court granted the same
    day. The order for emergency services directed Jackson to be transported to The
    Woodlands. Given that Meridian Services referred Jackson to APS, the petition
    for emergency services relied on similar grounds as the emergency detention
    application.
    [17]   Indiana Code section 12-10-3-28 outlines the process for obtaining an
    emergency protective order:
    (a) If:
    (1) an alleged endangered adult does not or is unable to
    consent to the receipt of protective services arranged by the
    division or the adult protective services unit or withdraws
    consent previously given; and
    (2) the endangered adult is involved in a life threatening
    emergency;
    the adult protective services unit, either directly or through the
    prosecuting attorney’s office of the county in which the alleged
    endangered adult resides, may petition the superior or circuit
    court in the county where the alleged endangered adult resides
    for an emergency protective order.
    (Emphasis added).
    [18]   The emergency protective order must stipulate: (1) the objectives of the
    emergency protective order, (2) the least restrictive emergency protective
    services necessary to attain the objectives of the emergency protective order that
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A02-1508-MI-1075 | March 17, 2016      Page 9 of 18
    the endangered adult must receive, and (3) the duration during which the
    endangered adult must receive the emergency protective services. 
    Ind. Code § 12-10-3-28
    (d)(1)-(3). Specifically, under subsection (f):
    An emergency protective order issued under this section may not
    remain in effect for longer than:
    (1) ten (10) days; or
    (2) thirty (30) days if the adult protective services unit
    shows the court that an extraordinary need exists that
    requires the order to remain in effect for not more than
    thirty (30) days.
    Further, subsection (g) provides:
    If at the expiration of an order the adult protective services unit
    determines that the endangered adult is in need of further
    protective services and the endangered adult does not consent to
    the receipt of the services, a petition may be filed under section
    21 of this chapter.
    [19]   In its emergency services order issued on April 27, 2015, the trial court
    stipulated the objectives of the emergency protective order and the least
    restrictive emergency protective services necessary to attain the objectives of the
    order. However, regarding duration the order reads:
    Norma Jackson upon discharge from the Gero-Psychiatric Unit
    of Meridian Services [], shall be transported to The Woodlands
    Care Center [], where she can continue to receive 24 hour
    medical and day to day care, until such time when she can be
    released by the Court under a Court Order with a letter from her
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A02-1508-MI-1075 | March 17, 2016     Page 10 of 18
    medical doctor stating she is able and ready for discharge into a
    lesser restrictive environment.
    Appellant’s App. p. 10.
    [20]   The language in the court’s order is at issue because the duration of the
    emergency services is indefinite. An emergency protection order may not
    remain in effect for more than ten days, or at most thirty days if APS can show
    that an extraordinary need for services exists. See 
    Ind. Code § 12-10-3-28
    (f). The
    purpose of emergency services is to remedy a life-threatening emergency.
    Jackson exhibited signs of dementia, which alone is not a life-threatening
    emergency.4 In effect, the trial court entered an involuntary protective services
    order that is outlined in Indiana Code section 12-10-3-21. Under Indiana Code
    section 12-10-3-28(g), after an emergency services protective order expires, APS
    is required to file a petition under section 21 if it believes that the endangered
    adult is in further need of protective services. APS only filed a verified petition
    for emergency services here, but nevertheless, the court treated it like an
    involuntary protective services petition.
    [21]   Furthermore, a hearing was held on June 26, 2015, on the emergency services
    petition. The trial court issued a protective services order on June 30, 2015,
    4
    We will address whether Jackson was involved in a life-threatening emergency in the sufficiency of the
    evidence section.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A02-1508-MI-1075 | March 17, 2016                      Page 11 of 18
    which included the same language as the April 27, 2015 emergency services
    order:
    It is considered, ordered, adjudged, and decreed by the Court
    that [Jackson] remain in the care of The Woodlands Care Center
    [], until such time when she can be released by the Court under a
    Court Order with a letter from her medical doctor stating she is
    able and ready for discharge into a lesser restrictive environment.
    Appellant’s App. p. 15. The emergency services order required that Jackson
    remain at The Woodlands for seventy-four days before the protective services
    order was issued. The protective services extended Jackson’s placement at The
    Woodlands until a doctor approves her release. In reality, this means that
    Jackson could remain at the Woodlands for the remainder of her life.
    [22]   This procedure caused Jackson to be detained against her will for over seventy
    days, when Indiana Code section 12-10-3-28(f) explicitly limits the duration of
    an emergency services protective order to thirty days, at most. Accordingly, the
    trial court erred by not stating a duration of thirty days or less in its emergency
    services order. APS then failed to file a petition under Indiana Code section 12-
    10-3-21 when they believed that Jackson was in need of continued protective
    services. As such, the trial court’s underlying protective services order is
    unauthorized by statute. After considering this well-meant but erroneous
    procedure, we now consider Jackson’s argument.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A02-1508-MI-1075 | March 17, 2016   Page 12 of 18
    Sufficiency of the Evidence
    [23]   Jackson argues that APS failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that
    she was an “endangered adult” and that a life-threatening emergency existed
    under Indiana Code section 12-10-3-28. Specifically, Jackson asserts that she
    has been involuntarily detained and deprived of her liberty and property.
    [24]   In reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence supporting a determination
    requiring clear and convincing evidence, we will consider only the evidence
    most favorable to the judgment and all reasonable inferences drawn therefrom.
    T.D. v. Eskenazi Health Midtown Cmty. Mental Health Ctr., 
    40 N.E.3d 507
    , 510
    (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (citing Commitment of L.W. v. Midtown Cmty. Health Ctr.,
    
    823 N.E.2d 702
    , 703 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005)). To be “clear and convincing,” the
    existence of a fact must be probable. 
    Id.
     (citing Lazarus Dep’t Store v. Sutherlin,
    
    544 N.E.2d 513
    , 527 (Ind. Ct. App. 1989)), reh’g denied, trans. denied. We will
    not reweigh the evidence or judge the credibility of witnesses. 
    Id.
     (citing Civil
    Commitment of T.K. v. Dept. of Veterans Affairs, 
    27 N.E.3d 271
    , 273 (Ind. 2015)).
    A. Endangered Adult
    [25]   Under Indiana Code section 12-10-3-28, for a trial court to enter an order for
    emergency protective services, clear and convincing evidence must exists that
    an individual is (1) an endangered adult, (2) a life threatening emergency exists,
    and (3) the endangered adult is in need of the proposed emergency services.
    Indiana code section 12-10-3-2(a) defines an “endangered adult” as:
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A02-1508-MI-1075 | March 17, 2016   Page 13 of 18
    An individual who is:
    (1) at least eighteen (18) years of age;
    (2) incapable by reason of mental illness, intellectual
    disability, dementia, habitual drunkenness, excessive use
    of drugs, or other physical or mental incapacity of
    managing or directing the management of the individual’s
    property or providing or directing the provision of self-
    care; and
    (3) harmed or threatened with harm as a result of:
    (A) neglect;
    (B) battery; or
    (C) exploitation of the individual’s personal services
    or property.
    [26]   In its petition for emergency services, APS included as an exhibit the
    physician’s report that accompanied Meridian Services’ application for
    emergency detention, which indicated that Jackson was diagnosed with
    dementia NOS. See Appellee’s App. p. 6. At the hearing, APS presented
    evidence from Dr. Valena that Jackson scored a six out of ten on a mental
    status examination after arriving at The Woodlands. She also testified that
    Jackson is very forgetful and her short-term memory is compromised. APS also
    called a certified nursing aide who testified that sometimes Jackson has trouble
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A02-1508-MI-1075 | March 17, 2016     Page 14 of 18
    finding her room and bathroom at The Woodlands but does a great job taking
    care of herself.
    [27]   After reviewing the evidence in the record, the trial court determined that
    Jackson was an “endangered adult.” Based on the evidence and circumstances,
    the finding that Jackson has dementia, which inhibits her ability to manage her
    property and self-care, is certainly probable. Therefore, we respect the trial
    court’s discretion and will not reweigh the evidence. However, in a society
    where more and more elder adults suffer from dementia, a life-threatening
    emergency is needed to justify restraint of such an elder adult’s liberty.
    B. Life Threatening Emergency
    [28]   “Life Threatening Emergency” is defined by Indiana Code section 12-10-3-4 as:
    a situation in which: (1) a severe threat to life or health of an
    endangered adult exists; (2) immediate care or treatment is
    required to alleviate that threat; and (3) the endangered adult is
    unable to provide or obtain the necessary care or treatment.
    [29]   We must first determine whether APS established that Jackson was in a
    situation with a severe threat to her life or health. Jackson was admitted to the
    Gero-Psychiatric Unit of Meridian Services after a series of events where she hit
    a small pine tree near her home, could not remember the location of her car,
    and called the police over twenty times attempting to locate the vehicle.
    Jackson was not injured in this accident, but the police determined that Jackson
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A02-1508-MI-1075 | March 17, 2016    Page 15 of 18
    would benefit from a psychological evaluation after conducting a welfare check
    at her home.
    [30]   Until the car accident occurred, and arguably after, Jackson was self-sufficient
    despite the forgetfulness caused by her dementia. Jackson purchased groceries,
    cooked meals, took out the trash, authorized the bank to pay her bills, and
    practiced good personal hygiene. Based on these facts and circumstances, we
    cannot conclude that Jackson’s dementia at this stage and by itself, constitutes a
    severe threat to her life or health.
    [31]   Even if Jackson’s dementia allegedly caused a severe threat to her life or health,
    the evidence indicates that immediate care or treatment was not required to
    alleviate the threat. Dr. Valena testified at the hearing that Jackson’s treatment
    includes taking Zyprexa and Depakote. She also stated that Jackson needs
    assistance taking her medication, that she needs twenty-four-hour care, and that
    she “may not be safe.” Statement of Evidence p. 6.
    [32]   Jackson was not treated for any injuries related to the underlying auto accident.
    Rather, she was admitted to the Gero-Psychiatric Unit several days after the
    accident. While taking medication for memory issues may assist Jackson to
    function more coherently, it is not immediate treatment that alleviates a severe
    threat to her life or health.
    [33]   Indiana Code section 12-10-3-28 seeks to provide emergency protective services
    to an endangered adult for a limited period of time. Here, Jackson may
    arguably be an endangered adult, but the treatment that Dr. Valena
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A02-1508-MI-1075 | March 17, 2016   Page 16 of 18
    recommended is long-term nursing home care, not immediate, emergency care.
    If APS believed that Jackson was in further need of care and treatment after the
    emergency protective services order expired, then it should have filed a petition
    under Indiana Code section 12-10-3-21. However, APS only filed a petition for
    emergency services.
    [34]   Lastly, we assess whether Jackson is unable to provide or obtain the necessary
    care or treatment for herself. Before she was admitted to the hospital, Jackson
    was self-sufficient. She lived alone in her home, with no immediate family
    nearby, but as previously mentioned could and did care for herself, or requested
    help from others when she needed it.
    [35]   Social worker Lucas testified that Jackson never knows the day of the week and
    needs to know the date so she can work, pay bills, and take out the trash.
    However, Lucas also conceded that Jackson did not work, had the bank pay her
    bills, and had no issues with trash accumulating in her home, so knowledge of
    the day of the week is not important to her health. Based on the record, it
    appears that the medical team at The Woodlands is most concerned that
    Jackson will not take her medication if she returns home.
    [36]   Jackson testified at the hearing that she would take medicine if she needed it
    but does not like to take “a bunch of drugs.” Tr. p. 29. It is also worth noting
    that APS did not present any evidence at the hearing to show that Jackson’s
    memory or cognition has improved or is functioning at a higher level because
    she is taking these medications. For all of these reasons, we cannot conclude
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A02-1508-MI-1075 | March 17, 2016   Page 17 of 18
    that APS proved by clear and convincing evidence that Jackson’s dementia
    constituted a life-threatening emergency.
    Conclusion
    [37]   The trial court erred when it failed to stipulate a duration of thirty days or less
    for Jackson’s emergency services order under the authorizing statute.
    Notwithstanding this error, APS established by clear and convincing evidence
    that Jackson was an “endangered adult.” However, APS did not present
    sufficient evidence that Jackson was involved in a life-threatening emergency
    under Indiana Code section 12-10-3-28. We therefore reverse the trial court’s
    order and remand with instructions that the trial court release Jackson from The
    Woodlands and allow her to return to her home.
    [38]   Reversed and remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
    Kirsch, J., and Brown, J., concur.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A02-1508-MI-1075 | March 17, 2016   Page 18 of 18
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 18A02-1508-MI-1075

Citation Numbers: 52 N.E.3d 821, 2016 Ind. App. LEXIS 77, 2016 WL 1062792

Judges: Mathias, Kirsch, Brown

Filed Date: 3/17/2016

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/18/2024