Adams v. May, Superintendent, 196 Md. 152

Summary

The Maryland Court of Appeals held that an appeal lies from a determination of sanity under Maryland Code, Article 59, sections 22 and 34A. The court concluded that the record was insufficient for review because there was no stenographic transcript or adequate substitute, but it affirmed the remand order without prejudice to a new proceeding. The opinion addressed statutory procedures for detention and discharge of persons confined in mental hospitals.

Holdings

1. An order determining sanity under sections 22 or 34A of Article 59 is a final determination in a civil proceeding and is appealable to the Court of Appeals of Maryland.
2. The court could not reach a judicial conclusion on the merits because the record contained no transcript or adequate substitute for the proceedings below; section 34A requires a stenographic transcript or equivalent record sufficient to permit appellate review.
3. The court would not direct Adams's discharge; it affirmed the order without prejudice to a new proceeding under sections 34A and 22.

Questions Presented

1. Whether an appeal lies from an order determining sanity and remanding a person to a mental hospital under sections 22 and 34A of Article 59.
2. Whether the appellate court could review the merits when the record contained no transcript or adequate substitute for the proceedings below.
3. Whether the order should be affirmed without prejudice to a new proceeding under sections 34A and 22.

Disposition

affirmed