Professional Negligence Law Reporter

An Illinois appellate court held that immunity under §45 of the state’s Disposition of Remains Act, 755 Ill. Comp. Stat. 65/45, does not require reasonable reliance.

Raashanai Coley died after her mother struck her. After learning of his daughter’s cremation, Coley’s father, Raashan Coley, sued Bradshaw & Range Funeral Home, P.C., alleging claims for emotional distress, reckless interference with the right to possess and preserve a minor’s body, and negligent interference. The plaintiff argued that as next of kin, he had the right to control the disposition of his daughter’s remains. The trial court granted Bradshaw’s motion to dismiss the third count. The jury found for the defense.

Affirming, the appellate court found that the Remains Act outlines which individuals have the right to dispose of a decedent’s remains, and §45 of the law provides immunity for a cemetery or crematory operation or funeral establishment that, in the absence of a grossly negligent or willful act, carries out the direction of any person representing they are entitled to control the disposition of a decedent’s remains. Citing case law, the court found that the statute contains no reference to reasonable reliance and declined to read additional limitations into the text of the law. The court rejected the plaintiff’s argument that such a conclusion would lead to absurd outcomes, noting that funeral establishments are protected from liability for negligent conduct, not gross negligence or willful misconduct.

Consequently, the court found that the Remains Act provided immunity to Bradshaw from the plaintiff’s negligence claim.

Citation: Coley v. Bradshaw & Range Funeral Home, P.C., 2020 Ill. App. 2d 190627 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020).