...in Restatement of Torts § 868 (1939) and recognized by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in Papieves v. Kelly, 437 Pa. 373...of a claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress. Second, Kearney argues, with respect to the Restatement of Torts § 868 (1939) action, that her use of the word "wanton..., Kearney argues that Pennsylvania has adopted or should adopt Restatement (Second) of Torts § 868 (1977). Since 1970, when the Pennsylvania Supreme Court adopted Restatement of Torts § 868, as a cause of action in Papieves, Restatement (Second...

.... Torts — Damages — Emotional distress — Intentional or wanton mishandling of body of a deceased relative — Restatement, Torts — Impact rule — Form of action. 1. There may be recovery for serious mental or emotional distress directly caused by the intentional, outrageous, or wanton conduct of another in mishandling the body of a deceased relative. [374-81] 2. Restatement, Torts, § 868, cited...prevent such interference with the plaintiffs' right to the decedent's body. Noting the rule of recovery set forth in the Restatement of Torts, § 868 (1939..., the sense of outrage and mental suffering being proper independent elements of compensatory damages." As indicated above, § 868 of the Restatement provides that one...

..., supra (citing Restatement of Torts § 868 (1939)). See also Kazatsky v. King David Memorial Park, Inc., 515 Pa. 183, 185 n. 1...Restatement (Second) of Torts § 46(2) for intentional infliction of emotional distress. The factual background of the case is as follows. In the early morning hours of June 1, 1989, Ka...expressed in the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 46(2) that, where distress caused by wrongful conduct directed at a third person is claimed, the plaintiff must have been "present at the time" of the...

...distress only if he personally mishandled the corpse. The district court, when granting summary judgment, reasoned that the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 868 (1977) "extend[s.... Perdue had not actually performed the autopsy, he was not responsible for causing the mother's emotional distress. The Restatement (Second) of Torts § 868 recognizes a tort for...the new position of the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 868 (1977), which states, "One who intentionally, recklessly or negligently removes, withholds, mutilates or operates upon the body of a dead person or prevents its proper interment or cremation is subject to liability"? The prior edition of the Restatement created...

...for infliction of emotional distress were not recoverable under such circumstances, the Supreme Court held the dismissal to be error, expressly adopting section 868 of the Restatement of Torts, which...liable to the member of the family of such person who is entitled to the disposition of the body. Id. at 119-120 n. 2 (quoting RESTATEMENT OF TORTS § 868 (1939)). The court...ruling in Papieves, the Restatement (Second) of Torts revised Section 868 to include the negligent mistreatment of a corpse as an actionable claim, as follows...

...of intentional interference with a dead body, as found in section 868 of the First Restatement of Torts: A person who wantonly mistreats the body of a dead person or who without...have their important place in the law of torts, but the liability attached to them will differ. Restatement (Second) of Torts § 8A cmt. b (emphasis added). Before we examine Weiley's complaint, we additionally recognize that a plaintiff can also plead that a tortfeasor wantonly mistreated the body, as per the first portion of section 868. Although...cause of action to include negligent conduct, as per the revised version of section 868 of the Restatement (Second) of Torts. He further...

...effect on it. Relying on Restatement (Second) of Torts § 868 (1979), plaintiffs currently fashion their claim as one for wrongful interference with a dead body. Plaintiffs' complaint alleged various tort and contract theories. In opposing HPSA's motion for summary judgment, plaintiffs did not mention any of those claims, but rather contended for the first time that "[l]iability is clear under Restatement 2d...the dead body is liable to the member of the family of such person who is entitled to the disposition of the body." Restatement of Torts § 868 (1939). In Hale v. Brown....2d 673 (Fla. 1995); Chisum v. Behrens, 283 N.W.2d 235 (S.D. 1979); W. Page Keeton et al., Prosser and Keeton on the Law of Torts § 54, at 362 (5th ed. 1984) (recognizing the "traditional rule [that had] denied recovery for mere negligence [in the mishandling of dead bodies], without circumstances of aggravation"). Prosser and Keeton describe their view of the true nature of claims relating to dead bodies as follows: See Restatement (Second) of Torts § 868 cmt...

.... In the alternative, Plaintiffs argue that this court should adopt the rule stated in the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 868 (1979). We hold that HRS § 663-8.9 does not apply to an NIED claim arising...should adopt the rule articulated in the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 868, establishing the independent tort of interference with dead bodies. We agree that HRS § 663-8.9 does not apply to a claim of...only adopted Restatement of Torts § 868 (1939), which allows recovery for intentional or wanton mistreatment of a corpse),appeal denied, 626 A.2d 1160 (Pa. 1993); Jobin v...

...urges a burden of proof based on negligent rather than intentional or malicious c conduct and cites as a basis the new position set forth in Restatement (Second) of Torts § 868 (1979), which provides...of Torts § 868 (1939). The new position was first proposed by the Restatement writers in a 1970 tentative draft, but it was not until the present volume, copyrighted in 1979 and...member of the family of the deceased who is entitled to the disposition of the body." The prior edition of the Restatement read as follows: "A person who wantonly mistreats the body of a dead person or...

...physical injury or was in the "zone of danger." Under the fiction of a "quasi-property" right in the survivors, the Second Restatement of the Law of Torts has proposed a cause of action for tortious interference with dead bodies: § 868. Interference...entitled to the disposition of the body. Restatement (Second) of Torts § 868 (1979). Nevertheless, comment a to section 868 concedes that...been exclusively one for the mental distress. Restatement (Second) of Torts § 868 cmt. a (1979) (emphasis added). Although courts recognize a cause of action for intentional mishandling of a dead body, few have allowed a plaintiff to proceed on a claim of negligence. Section 868 of the Restatement represents...

...applicability of the tort to wrongful autopsy or improper burial claims. To the contrary, the Restatement of Torts § 868, upon which the Kelley Court relied, provides that anyone who...the disposition of the body. The rule stated in the Restatement (Second) Torts § 868 applies not only to an..., but alive, in the middle of the highway, then Swanson would have been under a duty to Rubianogroot to exercise reasonable care to prevent further injury to him. See Restatement (Second) Torts, § 322...

...autopsy or improper burial claims. To the contrary, the Restatement of Torts § 868, upon which the Kelley Court relied, provides that anyone who.... The rule stated in the Restatement (Second) Torts § 868 applies not only to an intentional interference with a body, but also to...Rodrigue v. United States. . 788 F. Supp. 49, 51 (D.Mass. 1991); see also Restatement (Second) Torts, § 322., Cf...

...Torts § 12, at 58-59 (4th ed. 1971); Restatement of Torts § 868 (1939). In his appeal Burns argues that he properly instituted the suit as administrator because of a specific...part in refusing to grant the motion to amend was harmless error on the theory that Count II of the complaint does not state a claim for relief. Scholars in the field of torts hold the view that there is...a claim for relief for wrongful interference with the right to preserve a dead body. 1 F. Harper F. James, The Law of Torts § 9.4, at 674 n. 3 (1956); W. Prosser, Law of Torts § 54, at 329 n. 51 (4th...

...GRANTED. The issue, as stated by petitioner, is: Should this Court adopt the portion of the Restatement (Second) of Torts, Section 868-Interference with Dead...LAUX, Respondents PER CURIAM Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the...Superior Court ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW, this 5th day of March, 2024, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is...

...series of cases allowing recovery for negligent embalming, negligent shipment, or running over the body and the like, without such circumstances of aggravation. [The Law of Torts § 54, at 328-30 (4th ed. 1971) (citations and footnotes omitted).] The Restatement of Torts § 868 (2d... DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Appellant, v. Hattie Lee SMITH, et al., Appellees. No. 80-260. District of Columbia Court of...Appeals. Argued August 4, 1981. Decided November 2, 1981. Appeal from the Superior Court of the District...

...under Pennsylvania law. 1. Count V — Section 868 of the Restatement of Torts Claim Against the Officials in the Coroner's Office, the Hospital, the Crematory and its President...home and its president are liable under the Restatement of Torts § 868 (1939). The plaintiffs fail to allege facts sufficient to support a claim against the hospital or the coroner officials under...recovery set forth in the Restatement of Torts § 868 (1939)). This tort has been narrowly interpreted to protect "the right of a decedent's nearest relatives . . . against...

...both as the blackletter standard and as the majority rule among courts that have addressed this issue directly. As the appellate court below correctly recognized, while section 868 of the first Restatement of Torts suggested...that the recovery of emotional distress damages in cases like this required proof of wilful and wanton misconduct (Restatement of Torts, § 868 (1939)), the second restatement now...disposition of the body." (Emphases added.) Restatement (Second) of Torts § 868 (1979). This point is reiterated in the comments to section 868, which stress that "[t]he rule stated in this Section applies not only to an intentional interference with the body itself or with its proper burial or cremation, but also to an interference that is reckless or merely negligent." Restatement (Second...

...* * * ." In Restatement of Torts, § 868 (tentative draft 1970, p. 168). The American Law Institute...(Mo. 1965), citing 64 A.L.R.2d 100, that "the attitude toward recovery for emotional distress has tended to become somewhat more liberal," and its acceptance of 1 Restatement of Torts...mortician dealt with the body of plaintiff's deceased father and conducted burial services. The court applied the provision in 2 Restatement of Torts 2d, § 500, p. 587; "The actor's conduct is in reckless...