Davis v. True, et al.
| Docket Number: | 2006-CA-01011-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 09-04-2007 Opinion Author: GRIFFIS, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Disinterment of body Judge(s) Concurring: KING, C.J., LEE AND MYERS, P.JJ., IRVING, CHANDLER, BARNES, ISHEE, ROBERTS AND CARLTON, JJ. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - OTHER |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 06-01-2006 Appealed from: YALOBUSHA COUNTY CHANCERY COURT Judge: Percy L. Lynchard, Jr. Disposition: HELD APPELLANT UNLAWFULLY DISINTERRED A BODY FROM ITS FINAL RESTING PLACE, AND UNLAWFULLY RE-INTERRED IT IN ANOTHER GRAVE. APPELLANT ORDERED TO RE-INTER THE BODY IN ITS ORIGINAL RESTING PLACE. Case Number: 05-11-0108 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | WILLIAM EUGENE (BILL) DAVIS, SR. |
OMAR D. CRAIG
|
||
| Appellee: | DOROTHY LITTLETON TRUE, JOHN L. TRUE, PATRICIA ANN TRUE SCHMIDT, MARY JUANITA TRUE HEGWOOD, JAMES T. (JIM) TRUE, JANICE ELIZABETH DAVIS MCGRAW, AND WILLIAM EUGENE (BILLY) DAVIS, JR. | DENNIS M. BAKER |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Disinterment of body |
| Summary of the Facts: | Dorothy Littleton True, John L. True, Patricia Ann True Schmidt, Mary Juanita True Hegwood, James T. True, Janice Elizabeth Davis McGraw, and William Eugene Davis, Jr. brought this action against William Eugene Davis, Sr. after he had the body of his deceased wife exhumed and reburied elsewhere. The chancellor held that Bill, Sr. had unlawfully disinterred his deceased wife’s body and ordered him to rebury it in its original resting place. Bill, Sr. appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Bill, Sr. argues that the chancellor used incorrect factors in considering whether a body may be moved once it has been interred. Factors to consider in deciding whether a surviving spouse may remove the body of a deceased spouse to another burial site include public interest, wishes of the decedent, rights and feelings of those entitled to be heard by reason of relationship, rights and principles of religious bodies or other organizations which granted interment in the first burial site, and whether consent was given to interment in the first burial site by the one claiming the right of removal. In weighing the factors, the surviving spouse has a paramount right to designate the burial site and, if the parties were living in normal marital relations, a very strong case would be required to justify judicial interference with the survivor’s wish. The chancellor applied these exact factors to the case at bar and was not in error as a matter of law. It was undisputed that the decedent wanted to be buried “as close to her father as possible” in the Hopewell Cemetery. Every family member who testified, including Bill, Sr., acknowledged this. As for Bill, Sr.’s consent to the original burial site, James testified that Bill, Sr. picked out the first burial site after Frances passed away. John testified that everyone, including Bill, Sr. acquiesced in Frances’s first burial site. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
