Keaton v. G.C. Williams Funeral Home, Inc.
436 S.W.3d 538
Ky. Ct. App.2013Background
- Gamble purchased a burial plot in Green Meadows in 1991 adjacent to her late husband’s plot with a shared headstone.
- In 2005 Gamble completed a worksheet with funeral and burial preferences referencing her 1991 plot.
- Gamble died January 12, 2010; the family executed a funeral contract and an Interment Authorization the next day directing interment in Gamble’s 1991 plot.
- Gamble’s remains were buried January 16, 2010 in the wrong plot (Section 2, Lot 132-A, Grave 2) rather than the adjacent plot.
- Approximately six weeks later, the family had Gamble’s body disinterred and reinterred in the correct plot, with family present except for Eric.
- The Family sued G.C. Williams Funeral Home, Inc. and Green Meadows Cemetery, LLC in December 2010 for negligence, IIED, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, breach of contract, and KCPA violations; after discovery, the trial court granted summary judgment to the defendants on all counts except breach of contract; on appeal, the Court affirmed the grant of summary judgment on negligence, IIED, and KCPA, and upheld denial of summary judgment on the breach of contract claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Negligence claim viability after Osborne v. Keeney | Family asserts negligence elements were met, including emotional distress | Defendants contend no physical injury and no direct negligence basis | Negligence claim affirmed as properly dismissed (alternative basis upheld) depending on theory |
| IIED claim feasibility given lack of severe distress | Family asserts outrageous conduct caused severe distress | Conduct not outrageous; no proof of severe distress | IIED claim affirmed as properly dismissed |
| KCPA standing and applicability to cemetery conduct | Family has standing via ostensible/apparent agency; claims against cemetery valid | No privity; no fraudulent scheme shown; conduct not within KCPA scope | KCPA claims dismissed against both defendants; no unconscionable acts proven |
| Breach of contract interpretation of 'disposition of the remains' | Disputed term could include burial; damages shown. | Term ambiguous; intent uncertain; no summary judgment warranted | Summary judgment not warranted on breach of contract; factual dispute persists |
Key Cases Cited
- Mullins v. Commonwealth Life Ins. Co., 839 S.W.2d 245 (Ky. 1992) (elements of negligence)
- Pathways, Inc. v. Hammons, 113 S.W.3d 85 (Ky. 2003) (causation and injury elements in negligence)
- M & T Chemicals, Inc. v. Westrick, 525 S.W.2d 740 (Ky. 1974) (essential elements of negligence)
- Wilhoite v. Cobb, 761 S.W.2d 625 (Ky. App. 1988) (mental suffering recovery generally requires physical injury)
- Osborne v. Keeney, 399 S.W.3d 1 (Ky. 2012) (abandoned impact rule; requires severe emotional injury; retroactive)
- Goebel v. Arnett, 259 S.W.3d 489 (Ky. App. 2007) (outrageous conduct standard for IIED; court decides if conduct is extreme)
- Stringer v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 151 S.W.3d 781 (Ky. 2004) (prima facie case in IIED; elements of distress)
- Steelvest, Inc. v. Scansteel Service Center, Inc., 807 S.W.2d 476 (Ky. 1991) (summary judgment standard; burden on non-movant)
- City of Florence v. Chipman, 38 S.W.3d 387 (Ky. 2001) (summary judgment standards; view evidence for non-movant)
- Abney v. Nationwide Mutual Ins. Co., 215 S.W.3d 699 (Ky. 2006) (ambiguity in terms; extrinsic evidence admissible)
- Perkins Motors, Inc. v. Autotruck Federal Credit Union, 607 S.W.2d 429 (Ky. App. 1980) (damages recovery for contract breach)
- Capitol Cadillac Olds, Inc. v. Roberts, 813 S.W.2d 287 (Ky. 1991) (KCPA scope; unfair or deceptive acts; not for simple incompetence)
- Feathers v. State Farm Fire & Casualty, 667 S.W.2d 693 (Ky. App. 1983) (KCPA standards; unfair acts)