Ingaglio v. Kraeer Funeral Home, Inc., 87-0126
| Decision Date | 18 November 1987 |
| Docket Number | No. 87-0126,87-0126 |
| Citation | 515 So.2d 428,12 Fla. L. Weekly 2652 |
| Parties | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 2652 Phyllis INGAGLIO and Cheryl Tillberg, Appellants, v. KRAEER FUNERAL HOME, INC., Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Gerald V. Walsh of Gerald V. Walsh, P.A., Coral Springs, for appellants.
Doreen D. Anderson of Billing, Cochran & Heath, P.A., and Nancy Little Hoffmann of Nancy Little Hoffmann, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.
Plaintiffs/appellants appeal the summary final judgment and the order denying the plaintiffs' motion for rehearing and clarification of summary judgment. We reverse.
Plaintiffs claim damages for emotional distress caused by viewing the deceased's remains in the alleged "horrible condition" created by Funeral Home (Count I), and breach of contract (Count II).
Appellants, Phyllis Ingaglio and Cheryl Tillberg (plaintiffs), were respectively the spouse and daughter of the deceased Richard P. Ingaglio. Plaintiffs made arrangements with appellee, Kraeer Funeral Home (Funeral Home), to have the deceased's remains removed from the residence and prepared to be shipped to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, for viewing and burial.
Plaintiffs first viewed the deceased's remains in Philadelphia. According to plaintiffs, deceased's remains were in a horrifying condition. The clothing was not altered to fit. The cosmetics were applied in unnatural colors. The deceased's hair and moustache were colored orange. One eye bulged out and was improperly closed. Deceased's mouth was left open. Also, depositions of employees of the Pennsylvania Burial Company contained testimony that the deceased's remains had not been properly prepared and had decomposed because of inadequate embalming by Funeral Home.
Funeral Home employees claimed that the deceased's remains were prepared properly and denied any wrongdoing. Funeral Home was granted a summary judgment on the grounds that plaintiffs could not recover under Florida law for mental and emotional distress alone. We reverse.
Appellee acknowledges that the trial court erred in dismissing Count II, the breach of contract action. Accordingly, we reverse summary judgment as to Count II.
As to Count I, we disagree that Brown v. Cadillac Motor Car Div., 468 So.2d 903 (Fla.1985) and Champion v. Gray, 478 So.2d 17 (Fla.1985) extinguished the cause of action for tortious interference with dead bodies. Plaintiffs pleaded a cause of action for tortious interference with dead bodies. Under...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gonzalez v. Metropolitan Dade County Public Health Trust, 92-1462
...DCA), rev. denied, 570 So.2d 1303 (Fla.1990); Kirker v. Orange County, 519 So.2d 682 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988); Ingaglio v. Kraeer Funeral Home, Inc., 515 So.2d 428 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); Smith v. Telophase Nat'l Cremation Soc'y, Inc., 471 So.2d 163 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Ponton v. Scarfone, 468 So.2d......
-
Kirker v. Orange County, 87-14
...wanton or malicious behavior, such as would warrant the assessment of exemplary or punitive damages. See Ingaglio v. Kraeer Funeral Home, Inc., 515 So.2d 428 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987). Cf. Estate of Harper v. Orlando Funeral Home, Inc., 366 So.2d 126 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979), cert. denied, 386 So.2d 6......
-
Williams v. Boyd-Panciera Family Funeral Care, Inc.
...5th DCA 2017) ; Brady v. SCI Funeral Servs. of Fla., Inc. , 948 So. 2d 976, 978 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007) ; Ingaglio v. Kraeer Funeral Home, Inc. , 515 So. 2d 428, 429 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987). Whether conduct is sufficiently willful or wanton or outrageous is typically a question of law. See Matsumot......