Litigators of the Week: San Antonio Lawyers Secure $8 Million in Case Where Funeral Home Lost a Body
Two years ago a trio of San Antonio plaintiff lawyers filed a lawsuit against a funeral home company that sought to compel the defendant to answer…
February 16, 2018 at 12:43 PM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Texas Lawyer
Two years ago a trio of San Antonio plaintiff lawyers filed a lawsuit against a funeral home company that sought to compel the defendant to answer a simple but disturbing question: How could it possibly manage to lose the body of 25-year-old Julie Mott?
Sadly, the litigation has never produced a satisfactory answer for their clients, Julie's parents Tim and Shallote Mott.
But on Feb. 13, the attorneys convinced a Bexar County jury that the funeral home company was negligent for failing to secure Julie Mott's body, awarding her parents $8 million in mental anguish damages because they were never allowed to cremate her remains.
“It's bittersweet in that we were hoping we would uncover the testimony that would give the Motts closure,'' said Alex Katzman, a San Antonio lawyer who represented the Motts along with his St. Mary's University School of Law classmate Ron Salazar, and their mutual longtime friend Mark Greenwald.
The Motts alleged in their lawsuit that Mission Park Funeral Homes and Chapels (MPII Inc.) was negligent because it lost their daughter's body sometime between her Aug. 15, 2015, funeral and scheduled Aug. 16, 2015, cremation. The lawsuit also alleged the MPII Inc. refused to tell the Motts where their daughter's body was.
Instead of getting answers, the three plaintiffs attorneys ended up facing off against a team of 16 attorneys representing MPII Inc. that consistently resisted discovery requests.
“I can't tell you how many motions to compel we had to file just to get responses. The funeral home really dug in their heels at us to get information — simple things like what are your policies, how do you train?” Salazar said.
And the strange case became scandalous when MPII Inc. filed a response to the lawsuit that proposed that Julie Mott's body was stolen by her ex-boyfriend.
“It's made international news from the beginning,” Salazar said of the case. “We took over 50 deposition in the case . . . we had innumerable hearings.”
After refusing a $1.6 million settlement offer from the defendants, Salazar said the Motts decided to take their case to trial.
MPII Inc., which owns 14 funeral homes and cemeteries in central Texas, alleged during the three-week long trial that Mott's ex-boyfriend broke into one of its funeral parlors after Mott's services on August 15, 2015, and took her body because he didn't want it cremated. The company also designated the ex-boyfriend as a responsible third party in the case.
The San Antonio police have made no arrests in connection with the disappearance of Mott's body.
But the defense theory didn't hold up after Katzman and Salazar grilled company officials at trial about security issues at their funeral home and the lack of chain of custody documentation for Mott's body.
“They're claiming that a body was stolen. Well, was it during daytime or after the business was closed? And that led us to discover that their security was beyond abysmal,” Katzman said. “They had one lock for all of the doors. They had one security code for the facility that hadn't been changed since it was installed in 1985 — that every employee and former employee had.''
The jury concluded in its verdict that MPII Inc. was negligent because its premises presented an unreasonable risk of harm. The jury also found that Mott's body had not been unlawfully appropriated by either the ex-boyfriend or an unknown third party.
“It was a total victory for the Motts because we were able to demonstrate that there was no evidence that Julie's body was stolen. That narrows the focus down to the funeral home to explain what happened,” Salazar said.
Ricardo Reyna, a partner in San Antonio's Brock Person Guerra Reyna who was the lead attorney for MPII Inc., did not return a call for comment.
To win the $8 million in damages, the plaintiff attorneys argued to the jury that their clients were permanently stuck in their grief process — testimony they developed by using one of the defendant's own experts.
“We really had to develop the idea that our rituals and our beliefs and the respect that we show is borne out by love and the notion that what happens to somebody you love's body is incredibly important,” Salazar said.
“That was affirmed by the defendant's psychiatrist who confirmed in testimony that [the Motts] had suffered severe emotional loss,” Salazar said. “And the defense expert also confirmed that as a result of the loss of the body, they were unable to move through the stages of grief. Therefore they were stuck in the process.”
Greenwald, whose daughter was friends with Julie Mott during high school, said the lawsuit was his clients' only hope for getting answers about what happened to their daughter's body.
“Ultimately we could not get answers. The jury was clearly angered and horrified at how the funeral home was operated and the inability to explain what happened,” Greenwald said. “Julie Mott deserves better than this end. Her family will never get over the loss of her body. Nobody could, if they have a heart and a soul.”
“This case will haunt me until the day I die,” Greenwald added. “It was and is a horror movie but unlike a movie it is truly real.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllState Appellate Court Affirms $2.75M Jury Verdict in Negligence Suit Against Railroad Co.
5 minute readState Appellate Court Relies on 'Cancellation Rule' for Expert's Conflicting Testimony
Transgender Woman Awarded $150K Default Judgment Against Corrections Officer for Alleged Assault
Judge Relies on Recent 8th Circuit Clarification in Quest for Punitive Damages Against Logistics Company
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250