Linda F. Seals v. H & F, Inc. et al.

301 S.W.3d 237 (Tenn. 2010) · Supreme Court of Tennessee · January 15, 2010 · No. M2009-00330-SC-R23-CQ

Summary

The Tennessee Supreme Court answered three certified questions concerning the disposition of a decedent’s remains and liability for an allegedly wrongful cremation. It held that, absent a decedent’s pre-mortem direction, a surviving parent has priority over a fiancée or minor child; a minor may qualify as an heir under the crematory-operator safe harbor, but reliance on the minor’s instructions may be wanton or reckless; and a funeral home that merely arranges a cremation is not a crematory-facility operator under the statute.

Holdings

  1. When a decedent has not made a pre-mortem election or designated another person to make the decision, the right to direct disposition descends in this order: the spouse; adult children; parents; adult siblings; adult grandchildren; grandparents; and an adult who exhibited special care and concern. Accordingly, a surviving parent has priority over a fiancée and a minor child.
  2. The term heir in Tennessee Code Annotated section 62-5-511 includes minors.
  3. Although a minor may qualify as an heir under section 62-5-511, reliance on a minor's instructions may constitute wanton or reckless conduct and thereby defeat the statutory safe harbor when the operator knows or should recognize that the minor lacks the right to direct disposition. Whether the conduct was reckless is a question of fact.
  4. A funeral home that merely arranges for a cremation to be performed by another company is not the operator of a crematory facility and cannot rely on the section 62-5-511 safe harbor on that basis.

Questions Presented

  1. Who has the legal right to control disposition of a decedent's remains when the decedent left no direction and there is no surviving spouse, particularly as between a surviving parent, a fiancée, and a minor child?
  2. Does the term heir in Tennessee Code Annotated section 62-5-511 include a minor child, and can reliance on a minor heir's instructions constitute wanton or reckless conduct that defeats the statutory safe harbor?
  3. Is a funeral home that merely arranges for a cremation performed by another company an operator of a crematory facility under Tennessee Code Annotated section 62-5-511?

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (22)

  • Haley v. University of Tennessee-Knoxville, 188 S.W.3d 518, 521-23 (Tenn. 2006)(followed)
  • Akers v. Buckner-Rush Enterprises, Inc., 270 S.W.3d 67, 69, 73 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007)(adopted in part)
  • Hill v. Travelers' Insurance Co., 294 S.W. 1097, 1098-99 (Tenn. 1927)(followed)
  • Colonial Pipeline Co. v. Morgan, 263 S.W.3d 827, 836 (Tenn. 2008)(followed)
  • Perrin v. Gaylord Entertainment Co., 120 S.W.3d 823, 826 (Tenn. 2003)(followed)
  • Ganzevoort v. Russell, 949 S.W.2d 293, 296 (Tenn. 1997)(followed)
  • S. Constructors, Inc. v. Loudon County Board of Education, 58 S.W.3d 706, 710 (Tenn. 2001)(followed)
  • Hayes v. Gibson County, 288 S.W.3d 334, 337 (Tenn. 2009)(followed)
  • Eastman Chemical Co. v. Johnson, 151 S.W.3d 503, 507 (Tenn. 2004)(followed)
  • In re C.K.G., 173 S.W.3d 714, 722 (Tenn. 2005)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 22.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…