· 11/27/2002
Ely v. Hitchcock
Citations
- 58 P.3d 116
- 30 Kan. App. 2d 1276
- 2002 Kan. App. LEXIS 1055
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- noting that “vomiting may be the physical impact that a case requires,” but finding that vomiting without seeking counseling for the alleged trauma did not satisfy the physical injury requirement
- no outrage claim when funeral director allowed plaintiff to view mother's body with cut to her forehead and blood on her face and hair
- funeral director allowing plaintiff to view his mother’s body with a cut to her forehead and blood on her face and hair not sufficient to support claim of outrage
- funeral director allowing plaintiff to view his mother's body with a cut to her forehead and blood on her face and hair not sufficient to support claim of outrage
- funeral director allowing plaintiff to view his mother's body with a cut to her forehead and blood on her face and hair not sufficient to support claim of outrage
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Gernon, Green, Johnson
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.