Quantcast

SOUTHEAST TEXAS RECORD

Monday, November 4, 2024

Affirmed: $135,500 judgment against funeral home that buried baby in a cooler wrapped in duct tape

State Court
Armstrong

Armstrong

HOUSTON – A $135,000 judgment levied against a funeral home that buried a newborn in a cooler wrapped in duct tape has been affirmed on appeal.

In July 2017, Aqilla Hogan-Rogers filed suit against Psalms Funeral Home, alleging breach of contract, fraud, deceptive trade practices and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Hogan-Rogers asserts she contracted with Psalms to bury her newborn daughter. She claims the funeral home fraudulently lead her to believe that the baby would be buried in a traditional casket and violated the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act by failing to disclose that her daughter would be buried in a “food cooler wrapped closed with duct tape.”

Hogan-Rogers gave birth to her daughter on Jan. 14, 2016. She lived in the presence of her family for 14 hours and 53 minutes before passing away.

Court record show a trial court found in favor of Hogan-Rogers, awarding her $500 in actual damages, $45,000 for her emotional distress and mental anguish, and $90,000 in DTPA damages.

On appeal, Psalms argued the evidence was legally insufficient to support the trial courts finding because Hogan-Rogers was not a party to the contract, which was signed by her husband, who was not a named party in the lawsuit.

Psalms also argued the trial court abused its discretion by awarding damages for emotional distress and violations of the DTPA.

On Dec. 30, the Ninth Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s judgment, concluding “the evidence would enable a reasonable and fair-minded person to conclude that Psalms acted intentionally or at least recklessly” in the way it handled the burial of Hogan-Rogers’ daughter.

“[Psalms’] conduct was extreme and outrageous; and there is legally sufficient evidence proving that its conduct caused Hogan-Rogers severe emotional distress,” the opinion states.

Hogan-Rogers is represented by Marrick Armstrong, an attorney for the Pearland law firm of Stephens, Reed & Armstrong.

Appeal case No. 09-19-00269-CV

ORGANIZATIONS IN THIS STORY

More News