Skip to main content
· 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 CourtListener

Sourced 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.