Ingaglio v. Kraeer Funeral Home, Inc.
Docket: No. 87-0126
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; November 17, 1987; Florida; State Appellate Court
Plaintiffs Phyllis Ingaglio and Cheryl Tillberg appeal the summary judgment and the denial of their motion for rehearing regarding their claims against Kraeer Funeral Home. They allege damages for emotional distress stemming from the condition of the deceased, Richard P. Ingaglio, upon viewing his remains, which they describe as horrifying due to improper preparation. Specific complaints included ill-fitting clothing, unnatural cosmetic application, discolored hair, and improper closure of the eyes and mouth. Testimony from employees of the Pennsylvania Burial Company supported claims of inadequate embalming by the Funeral Home, while the Funeral Home maintained that they had prepared the remains correctly. The trial court granted summary judgment to the Funeral Home, asserting that Florida law does not allow recovery for mental and emotional distress absent physical injury. The appellate court reversed this decision, acknowledging an error in dismissing the breach of contract claim (Count II) and asserting that the plaintiffs had adequately pleaded a tortious interference claim regarding the deceased’s remains (Count I). The court held that under Florida law, while recovery for emotional distress typically requires evidence of physical injury, malice can be inferred from a lack of care or indifference. The appellate court found sufficient material facts that could suggest the Funeral Home’s conduct was malicious, thereby warranting a jury's consideration. The summary judgment was reversed and the case remanded for further proceedings. Judges Glickstein and Dell concurred in the decision.