It Was 'Heartrending,' But This Florida Case Shows the Limits of Personal Injury Law
"This case is going to radically change the funeral service industry if this opinion is left to stand as it is," said plaintiffs attorney David H. Charlip.
March 12, 2020 at 03:16 PM
4 minute read
A lawsuit against a Pembroke Pines funeral home that lost remains of a miscarried baby floundered at the Fourth District Court of Appeal, which found that although the case was "troubling and heartrending," it didn't have what it takes to proceed.
The case demonstrates the limits of Florida personal injury law, which under most circumstances doesn't provide an avenue for damages without a physical injury.
Deon Williams and Evan Chang sued Boyd-Panciera Family Funeral Care Inc. in Pembroke Pines for negligence and egregious misconduct in 2016. They sought damages for emotional distress, after employees deviated from protocol and lost track of stillborn baby Grace's cremated body.
But the plaintiffs suffered no physical impact that would support their complaint.
The Fourth DCA acknowledged the plaintiffs' ordeal, but found the defendant's conduct wasn't egregious enough to warrant an exception under Florida's impact rule, which allows suits with evidence of outrageous conduct.
The appellate panel turned to the Florida Supreme Court for guidance—specifically to 1995 case Gonzalez v. Metropolitan Dade County Public Health Trust, which involved allegations against a funeral home after a baby's body was found in a refrigerated drawer two months after parents held a funeral and burial.
In that case, the state court declined to step away from the impact rule, finding "[T]he consequences [would be] too far reaching in a modern society, where it is recognized that not all wrongs can be compensated through litigation or the courts," according to the Fourth DCA's ruling.
Attorney fees for funeral home
Attorney David H. Charlip of Charlip Law Group in Miami, represented the parents at trial. He said he's "dismayed and perplexed" by the ruling, which he worries could have "unintended consequences" for emotional distress claims.
"I can't imagine a situation that was more outrageous than this. If a funeral home can mishandle remains or cremains in a manner worse than was done here, I don't know how, so effectively I don't know anyone could ever recover from a funeral home after this again," Charlip said. "This case is going to radically change the funeral service industry if this opinion is left to stand as it is."
Charlip claims the defendant sent his clients a letter with an apology and a refund, without speaking to them about what happened, then gave conflicting information to the young couple, for whom this was their first child.
"They had checks and balances in place to make sure nothing like this ever happened, and essentially nothing was followed," Charlip said.
In affirming Broward Circuit Judge Sandra Perlman's dismissal, the appellate panel also awarded attorney fees for the defendants.
"I think that to say, 'It adds insult to injury' would be putting it mildly," Charilp said.
A similar South Florida suit came to a different conclusion in 2019, when parents reached a $1 million settlement with a funeral home after it mixed up the bodies of two stillborn babies. But in that case, the defendant allegedly tried to cover up what had happened.
Related story: 'The Funeral Home Lost Jarvis' Body': $1M Settlement After Babies Placed in Wrong Coffin
'A tragic, horrible mistake'
Defense attorney Mark D. Tinker of Cole, Scott & Kissane in Tampa said the funeral home did everything it could to find the remains, including hiring an outside independent investigator, interviewing employees and even donating to a fund to help the family establish closure.
"It was obviously a tragic, horrible mistake. But it was just that, it was a mistake. Because of the nature of what they were doing, the effect it has can be upsetting and horrible, but at the end of the day it's just a mistake," Tinker said. "But the one and only thing they could not do was obviously what the parents wanted—to find the ashes—because nobody knows what happened to them."
Fourth DCA Judge Cory J. Ciklin wrote the ruling, with Judges Carole Y. Taylor and Jeffrey T. Kuntz concurring.
Charlip said he'll ask the court to reconsider via a request for an en banc review.
Read the ruling:
More appeals:
Is This South Florida Traffic Ticket Company Practicing Law Without a License?
Billionaire Tangled in Trump-Ukraine Scandal Notches Win in Hacking Case
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
© 2025 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 AllLocal Boutique Expands Significantly, Hiring Litigator Who Won $63M Verdict Against City of Miami Commissioner
3 minute readGreenberg Traurig Combines Digital Infrastructure and Real Estate Groups, Anticipating Uptick in Demand
4 minute readUS Judge Cannon Blocks DOJ From Releasing Final Report in Trump Documents Probe
3 minute readPlaintiffs Allege Carollo Retaliated Over Bayfront Trust Accounting Discoveries
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Decision of the Day: Judge Dismisses Defamation Suit by New York Philharmonic Oboist Accused of Sexual Misconduct
- 2California Court Denies Apple's Motion to Strike Allegations in Gender Bias Class Action
- 3US DOJ Threatens to Prosecute Local Officials Who Don't Aid Immigration Enforcement
- 4Kirkland Is Entering a New Market. Will Its Rates Get a Warm Welcome?
- 5African Law Firm Investigated Over ‘AI-Generated’ Case References
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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