1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

ERIC J. DUBIN, ESQ., SBN: 160563 DUBIN LAW FIRM 19200 Von Karman Ave., Sixth Floor Irvine, California 92612 Telephone: (949) 477-8040 JESSICA B. CHA, ESQ., SBN: 248071 LAW OFFICES OF J.CHA & ASSOCIATES 310 West 4TH Street Santa Ana, California 92701 Telephone: (714) 361-1421 Attorneys for Plaintiffs ALBERTO PERNUDI, MARIELENA COVARRUBIAS, and PATRICIA KHAZRAEI SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, CENTRAL DISTRICT

ALBERTO PERNUDI, MARIELENA COVARRUBIAS, and PATRICIA KHAZRAEI

CASE NO:

Plaintiffs, v.

19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Defendants. ROSE HILLS MEMORIAL PARK, SERVICE CORPORATION INTERNATIONAL, DIGNITY MEMORIAL NETWORKS, SCI CALIFORNIA FUNERAL SERVICES, INC, and DOES 1-100

COMPLAINT FOR: 1. INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS; 2. NEGLIGENCE; 3. BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY; 4. NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS; 5. TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE WITH RIGHT TO DISPOSE OF REMAINS; 6. TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE WITH DEAD BODIES; 7. EQUITABLE/INJUNCTIVE RELIEF; 8. VIOLATIONS OF BUSINESS & PROFESSIONS CODE SECTION 17200; 9. VIOLATIONS OF BUSINESS & PROFESSIONS CODE SECTIOM 17500; 10. FRAUD/CONCEALMENT/NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION 11. FRAUD/CONCEALMENT/INTENTIONAL MISREPRESENTATION; AND 12.BREACH OF CONTRACT

COMPLAINT 1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL JUDGE: DEPT:

NATURE OF ACTION 1. This lawsuit challenges the morally despicable, fraudulent, unlawful and unfair business

8 practices at Rose Hills Memorial Park, Service Corporation International, Dignity Memorial 9 Networks, and SCI California Funeral Services, Inc. (Defendants) who are the owners, 10 operators and managers of Rose Hills. Unfortunately, this is not the first time Defendant Service Corporation International has been charged with engaging in horrific funeral practices. 11 2. The actions of Defendants are despicable and morally reprehensible and have caused 12 severe compensatory damages to Plaintiffs. 13 3. At all relevant times, Plaintiff, Alberto Pernudi was and is an individual residing in 14 California is in the City of Pasadena, County of Los Angeles. 15 4. At all relevant times, Plaintiff, Marielena Covarrubias, was and is an individual residing in

16 California is in the City of Whittier, County of Los Angeles. 17 18 19 5. At all relevant times, Plaintiff, Patricia Khazraei, was and is an individual residing in California is in the City of Temple City, County of Los Angeles. 6. Defendant Service Corporation International (SCI) is a Texas corporation. SCI is a publically traded company listed on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol SCI.

20 SCI individually participated, ratified, approved and/or directed the improper or illegal acts and 21 omissions described herein. SCI provides death care services and products under the Dignity 22 Memorial brand name. At all times relevant hereto, Defendants owned, operated, managed and 23 were responsible for all business decisions of and at Rose Hills Memorial Park. 7. Defendant SCI California Funeral Services, Inc, (SCI California) is a California 24 corporation authorized to do business and is engaged in business in Los Angeles County. SCI 25 California individually participated, ratified, approved and/or directed the improper or illegal 26 acts and omissions described herein. Defendant SCI California maintains its principal place of 27 business in Los Angeles County, California. 28
COMPLAINT 2

1 2

8. Defendant Rose Hills Memorial Park (Rose Hills) is a California Corporation authorized to do business and is engaged in business in Los Angeles County. Rose Hills individually

3 participated, ratified, approved and/or directed the improper or illegal acts and omissions 4 described herein. 5 6 7 8 9. The true names and capacities of Defendants DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, whether individual, plural, corporate, partnership, associate or otherwise, are not known to Plaintiffs, who therefore sues said Defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that each of the Defendants designated herein as DOE are in some manner responsible for the acts and occurrences set forth herein. Plaintiffs will ask leave of

9 court to amend this Complaint to show the true names and capacities of Defendants DOES 1 10 through 100, inclusive, as well as the manner in which each DOE defendant is responsible, 11 when the same have been ascertained. 10. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and upon such basis allege, that at all times herein 12 13 14 mentioned, each of the Defendants herein were an agent, servant, employee, co-conspirator, partner, joint venturer, wholly owned and controlled subsidiary and/or alter ego of each of the remaining Defendants, and were at all times acting within the course and scope of said agency, 15 service, employment, conspiracy, partnership and/or joint venture. 16 11. Defendants, and each of them, aided and abetted, encouraged and rendered substantial

17 assistance in accomplishing the wrongful conduct, wrongful goals and other wrongdoings 18 complained of herein. In taking action, as particularized herein, to aid and abet and substantially assist the commission of the wrongful acts and other wrongdoings complained of, 19 each of the Defendants acted with an awareness of its primary wrongdoing and realized that its 20 conduct would substantially assist the accomplishment of the wrongful conduct, wrongful goals, 21 and other wrongdoing. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 JURISDICTION AND VENUE 12. Pursuant to Los Angeles Superior Court Rule 2.3(a)(1)(B) venue is appropriate in the County of Los Angeles Central District. This Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendants and each of them by reason of the facts that: 1) Defendants have transacted and conducted substantial business in the State of California, the County of Los Angeles, and the Central District; 2) Plaintiffs injury occurred in the State of California and the County of Los
COMPLAINT 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Angeles; and 3) the events giving rise to the claims at issue in this lawsuit arose in California, including within the County of Los Angeles and the Central District.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND 13. This lawsuit is brought by the children of Mercedes Adilia Rodriguez, in what has to be the most horrific funeral home case in American history. The admitted unlawful conduct of Rose Hills Memorial Park (Rose Hills), the Nations largest cemetery, is almost unimaginable- shamefully desecrating two loving Mothers dignity, cultural traditions, and religious beliefs leaving behind permanent pain and emotional trauma. 14. Mercedes Adilia Rodriguez was born on September 24, 1922 in the colonial city of

10 Granada, Nicaragua, which was founded by the Spaniards in 1620. People born in Granada are 11 very traditional and notorious for European idiosyncrasies - one being that Granadinians always 12 go back to Granada, alive or dead. If you are born in Granada you die in Granada or are laid to 13 14 rest in Granada. Underground burial is not permitted by tradition. 15. On September 30, 2010, Plaintiffs loving and warm-hearted Mother, Mercedes Rodriguez, died after devoting a lifetime to her three children, 11 grandchildren, and 2 great

15 grandchildren. Plaintiffs contracted Rose Hills to prepare their mother for burial at the familys 16 sacred above ground burial site at her birth place of Granada, Nicaragua to join her Mother and 17 Sister in eternal peace. The entire family was to travel to Nicaragua to greet her body at the 18 airport, and conduct the closed casket services and funeral their Mother had always requested upon her passing. Underground burial is not permitted by tradition. 19 16. For this simple yet devastatingly important responsibility of ensuring their Mother safely 20 arrive in Nicaragua, Plaintiffs chose Rose Hills based on their proclaimed understanding and 21 compassion for the vast ethnic cultures and traditions in Southern California. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
COMPLAINT 4

Rose Hills Memorial Park & Mortuaries provides comprehensive memorial care to Los Angeles County and Orange County families. We have expertise in the funeral and burial traditions of many cultures, and our team is proud to offer assistance in English, Spanish, Mandarin, Cantonese, Korean and Vietnamese. - Rose Hills Website

1 2

17. Like many culturally diverse and loving families in the areas of Rose Hills targeted markets, Plaintiffs trusted Rose Hills to understand and respect the critical importance of deep

3 rooted burial traditions, religions, and superstitious beliefs that so many Southern California 4 residents value to their core. 5 6 7 8 18. Instead, Rose Hills did the unthinkable; they lost track of Plaintiffs mother, placed her in the wrong casket, prepared and dressed her in a complete strangers clothes, and horrifically presented her to the wrong family in an open casket funeral service, to be mourned, touched, grieved, and then sacreligiously buried underground - violating her lifelong cultural beliefs, superstitions, dying wishes, and personal convictions. Any and all 9 quality checks and procedures totally failed, and Rose Hills inexplicably presented the 10 Plaintiffs Mother to another family inexplicably ignorant of their catastrophic failure to 11 check body identifications on either women. 19. Plaintiffs are forever haunted by the vision of how a complete strangers family and 12 13 14 friends mourned, touched, kissed, and cried with Plaintiffs Mother, before sacrilegiously burying her in a strangers plot. Like Plaintiffs, in the midst of their grief this strangers family unconditionally trusted Rose Hills unfathomable misrepresentation that the woman placed in

15 their Mothers open casket was their Mother, and not a total stranger dressed up in her clothes 16 and accessories. The fact not a single Defendant employee ever checked, verified, or even 17 questioned that strangers were morning and burying Plaintiffs Mother warrants punitive 18 damages. 20. Plaintiffs Mother was buried underground in a strangers grave under a strangers 19 tombstone for an appalling three rainy day and nights, sacrilegiously being violated of her 20 cultural beliefs and dying wish to never be buried underground. Plaintiffs were aware their 21 entire lives how their Mother feared to the bone being buried underground, often saying: 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Debe de ser muy frio y yo soy muy friolenta (it must be very cold and I am always cold). -Mercedes Adilia Rodriguez (1922-2010) 21. Three days after the wrongful burial, Rose Hills dug up Plaintiffs Mother in the middle of a rainy night, stripped the strangers clothes and accessories from her cold naked body, and gave the other family a do-over funeral all concealed from Plaintiffs until after the fact.
COMPLAINT 5

1 2

22. Plaintiffs were in the midst of preparing to travel to Nicaragua to meet their Mothers body at the airport, to deliver her to her final place at the sacred, above ground cemetery in

3 Granada, Nicaragua, when a Rose Hills salesperson telephoned them with this crippling 4 revelation despite having first been advised by the husband of Marielena Covarrubias not to 5 communicate the revelation over the phone. 23. Rose Hills salesperson, Carmen Blue, engaged in even further intentional infliction of 6 emotional distress during the course and scope of her employment with Rose Hills, with her 7 outrageous response to this unlawful incompetence by telling the Plaintiffs: 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 24. This statement of optional disclosure further adds to the Plaintiffs painful and reoccurring visions and nightmares - realizing how shockingly close their Mothers soul was from being trapped underground in a strangers grave for eternity, never to be reunited to rest in peace with her loved ones in Nicaragua. 25. The Plaintiffs were forced to view and identify their Mothers remains after she was Rose Hills had no obligation to notify the family as to what happened, but they felt it was the right thing to do.

16 callously dug up in the middle of the night three (3) days post burial and eight (8) days post 17 mortem, adding a horrifying layer of trauma (a trauma that follows them to this day) that no 18 family should ever go through. 26. Rose Hills has since admitted full liability to the Department of Consumer Affairs 19 Cemetery and Funeral Bureau following its investigation into both occurrences. 20 27. The two elderly Hispanic women involved had the common last name Rodriguez, and 21 Rose Hills carelessly ignored all procedural safety checks, and treated these distinct and loving 22 Mothers interchangeably. The safety check system of Rose Hills was so reckless and flawed, 23 the same common last name of Rodriguez was all it took for this tragedy to occur; which, calls 24 into question Rose Hills prior and/or ongoing recklessness with the sacred remains of countless of other deceased love ones. 25 28. Rose Hills unfathomable and unlawful conduct robbed Plaintiffs of the opportunity to 26 grieve the passage of their Mother, replacing grief with anger and horror, and forever destroying 27 28
COMPLAINT 6

1 2 3

the familys ability to lovingly remember their Mother, Grandmother, and Great Grandmother without also remembering the nightmare inflicted by Rose Hills. 29. The entire family has been permanently traumatized. For example, Daughter Marielena

4 has been forever traumatized by nightmares that were unexplainable until Rose Hills admitted 5 their horrific conduct. In her nightmares, her Mother was screaming, scratching, and calling out to her to get me out of here, not knowing the unspeakable truth that her premonitions were 6 devastatingly real - coinciding with the three nights her Mother was buried underground. Over 7 one year after her Mothers passing, Daughter Marielena is still devastatingly haunted by her 8 premonitions. 9 30. Rose Hills is owned by Service Corporation International (SCI). Unfortunately, this 10 is not the first time Defendant SCI has been charged with engaging in horrific funeral practices 11 bordering on the criminal. Recently at the National Funeral Home facility in Fairfax County, 12 Virginia, approximately 200 bodies were reported stored naked in various stages of 13 14 decomposition in conditions described as "disgusting, degrading and humiliating," including "at least half a dozen veterans destined for the hallowed ground at Arlington National Cemetery. SCI has also been subject to a $200 million dollar class action lawsuit in Florida, and another 31. SCIs ownership was concealed in all the Rose Hills documents, which the Plaintiffs

15 class action in California. 16 17 signed unaware of SCIs extensive history of devastating families across the nation. Had 18 Plaintiffs known Rose Hills was owned and operated by a company such as SCI, they would not have used any of Defendants services. 19 32. Rose Hills express and appalling admission that they made the optional decision to 20 inform Plaintiffs of their unlawful conduct (even though they could have exercised their right 21 not to) begs the question of how many mistakes of this magnitude Rose Hills has made and then 22 made the decision to conceal - further warranting punitive damages. How many other 23 Rodriguezes, Smiths, Lees, or Wongs are buried in the wrong grave, in the wrong casket, their 24 souls trapped eternally by Rose Hills obviously flawed verification system of alleged care and competence? 25 /// 26 /// 27 28
COMPLAINT 7

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION FOR INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS (AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS AND DOES 1-100)

33. Plaintiffs restate and re-allege each and every allegation in the paragraphs 1 through 32 as if fully set forth herein. 34. Defendants conduct as described herein was extreme and outrageous, and was so extreme as to exceed all bounds of that usually tolerated in a civilized society. Defendants conduct as described herein was committed with the intent to cause, or with reckless disregard

9 of causing, emotional distress to Plaintiffs. Like many culturally diverse and loving families in 10 the areas of Rose Hills targeted markets, Plaintiffs trusted Rose Hills to understand and respect 11 the critical importance of deep rooted burial traditions, religions, and superstitious beliefs that 12 so many Southern California residents value to their core. 13 14 35. Rose Hills extreme and outrageous conduct is very clear: they lost track of Plaintiffs mother, placed her in the wrong casket, prepared and dressed her in a complete strangers clothes, and horrifically presented her to the wrong family in an open casket funeral

15 service, to be mourned, touched, grieved, and then sacreligiously buried underground 16 violating her lifelong cultural beliefs, superstitions, dying wishes, and personal convictions. 17 Any and all quality checks and procedures totally failed, and Rose Hills inexplicably 18 presented the Plaintiffs Mother to another family inexplicably ignorant of their catastrophic failure to check body identifications on either woman. 19 20 36. Plaintiffs are forever haunted by the vision of how a complete strangers family and

21 friends mourned, touched, kissed, and cried with Plaintiffs Mother, before sacrilegiously 22 burying her in a strangers plot. Like Plaintiffs, in the midst of their grief this strangers family 23 unconditionally trusted Rose Hills unfathomable misrepresentation that the woman placed in 24 their Mothers open casket was their Mother, and not a total stranger dressed up in her clothes and accessories. The fact not a single Defendant employee ever checked, verified, or even 25 questioned that strangers were morning and burying Plaintiffs Mother warrants punitive 26 damages. 27 28
COMPLAINT 8

1 2

37. Plaintiffs Mother was buried underground in a strangers grave under a strangers tombstone for an appalling three rainy day and nights, sacrilegiously being violated of her Plaintiffs were aware their

3 cultural beliefs and dying wish to never be buried underground.

4 entire lives how their Mother feared to the bone being buried underground, often saying: 5 6 7 8 Debe de ser muy frio y yo soy muy friolenta (it must be very cold and I am always cold). -Mercedes Adilia Rodriguez (1922-2010) 38. Three days after the wrongful burial, Rose Hills dug up Plaintiffs Mother in the middle

9 of a rainy night, stripped the strangers clothes and accessories from her cold naked body, and 10 gave the other family a do-over funeral all concealed from Plaintiffs until after the fact. 11 39. Rose Hills salesperson Carmen Blue intentionally further caused emotional distress

12 under course and scope of her employment with Rose Hills, when she intentionally disregarded the plea from the husband of Daughter Marielena not to communicate the revelation to the 13 family over the phone. Carmen Blue caused even further emotional distress when she met with 14 the Plaintiffs and offered her outrageous response to this unlawful incompetence by telling the 15 Plaintiffs: 16 17 18 19 20 Rose Hills had no obligation to notify the family as to what happened, but they felt it was the right thing to do. 40. This statement of optional disclosure further adds to the Plaintiffs painful and reoccurring visions and nightmares - realizing how shockingly close their Mothers soul was

21 from being trapped underground in a strangers grave for eternity, never to be reunited to rest in 22 peace with her loved ones in Nicaragua. 23 41. Furthermore, Plaintiffs repeated requests to speak with a manager or director of

24 operations was ignored, only to later receive a letter from management self-proclaiming client satisfaction for not charging Plaintiffs for the permanent devastation caused. 25 42. The emotional devastation the Defendants caused Plaintiffs is undeniable. Words 26 used by the family to describe their pain, over a year later, include trauma, horror, anger, 27 humiliation, disrespect, emotional devastation, constant nightmares, ongoing feelings of 28 COMPLAINT
9

1 2

being violated, anxiety attacks, trouble sleeping, difficulty concentrating, unbearable mental anguish and pain, failure to grieve or recover, a sense of failure to their mother, and

3 so much stress that even divorce was contemplated by one. 4 43. Plaintiffs suffered and continue to suffer from severe or extreme emotional distress, 5 which was actually and proximately caused by the Defendants outrageous conduct as set for herein. Defendants undertook the aforesaid illegal acts intentionally or with conscious 6 disregard of the rights of Plaintiffs, and did so with fraud, oppression and/or malice. 7 44. Therefore, Plaintiffs are also entitled to punitive damages against Defendants in an 8 amount to be determined at trial. 9 10 11 12 13 45. Plaintiffs restate and re-allege each and every allegation in the paragraphs 1 through 44 14 15 as if fully set forth herein. 46. By accepting the care, custody and control of the remains of Plaintiffs Mother, Mercedes SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION FOR NEGLIGENCE (AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS AND DOES 1-100)

16 Adilia Rodriguez, Defendants undertook a duty of care to Plaintiffs. Defendants duty to 17 Plaintiffs included but were not limited to the following: 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Not to ignore the family and loved ones express religious, cultural, traditional, and personal dying wishes; Not to ignore contract and obligations; Not to ignore the individual life of all persons, regardless of ethnic, culture, or appearances; Not to ignore reasonable and required identification numbers and bracelets purported safety checks, merely because a deceased shared a common ethnic last name, and appearance, even before displaying in an open casket and permanent burial; Not to inter human remains in locations other than the plot in which the remains were intended to be properly interred; Not to lose the human remains of individuals;
COMPLAINT 10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Not to intentionally, recklessly, and/or negligently publish, disseminate, circulate and/or place before the public, either directly or indirectly, statements that were untrue; deceptive and/or misleading regarding the business patterns and practices at Rose Hills.

To use reasonable care in all aspects of their cemetery, mortuary and funeral business; To handle and inter human remains in a proper and dignified manner; To hire and retain persons qualified and capable of providing proper cemetery, mortuary and funeral related services; To properly supervise their employees and make sure they were using reasonable care in providing the Plaintiffs with appropriate cemetery and funeral services; To inspect, audit and correct body identification procedures and other related procedures at Rose Hills. To correct the numerous problems discussed in this complaint after Defendants knew or should have known of the problems without causing further trauma.

47. Defendants breached each of the above duties, and were negligent by failing to use reasonable care in virtually all aspects of their cemetery business, including but not limited to those set forth below: Ignoring the family and loved ones express religious, cultural, traditional, and personal dying wishes Ignoring the contract and obligations; Ignoring the individual life Plaintiffs Mother (and stranger), regardless of ethnicity, culture, or appearances; Ignoring reasonable and required identification numbers, tags/bracelets and other purported safety checks, because the deceased shared a common ethnic last name and similar appearances, even before displaying in an open casket and permanent burial. Temporarily concealing the grotesque mishandling of remains, sand stating that corporate policy renders it optional for Defendants to disclose such egregious conduct to the loved ones to whom they owed a duty of care;

COMPLAINT 11

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

Interring decedents in locations other than the plot in which the remains were intended to be properly interred; Losing the human remains of individuals; Interring Plaintiffs Mother against express religious, cultural, traditional, and last dying wishes; Intentionally, recklessly, and/or negligently misinforming Plaintiffs as to the state and condition of interment plots, services, interments, and human remains; Intentionally, recklessly, and/or negligently publishing, disseminating, circulating and/or placing before the public, either directly or indirectly, statements that were untrue, deceptive and/or misleading regarding the business patterns and practices at Rose Hills, Dignity, and SCI;

Handling and interring human remains in an improper and undignified manner; Hiring and retaining persons not qualified and not capable of providing proper funeral cemetery related services; Not properly supervising their employees and making sure they were using reasonable care in providing the Plaintiffs with appropriate interment services; Failure to inspect, audit and/or correct ineffective body identification procedures and other related procedures as Rose Hills; and Not correcting the numerous problems identified in this complaint after Defendants knew or should have known of the problem.

48. Defendants knew, should have known or could reasonably foresee that their wrongful

20 acts and omissions would injure the Plaintiffs. 49. Defendants conduct as described herein was extreme and outrageous, and was so extreme 21 as to exceed all bounds of that usually tolerated in a civilized society. 22 50. Plaintiffs are suffering from severe or extreme emotional distress, and Defendants 23 negligence was a substantial factor in causing Plaintiffs severe or extreme emotional distress. 24 51. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendants, Plaintiffs suffered and 25 continue to suffer the economic and non-economic damages. 26 52. Defendants failure to use reasonable care and their negligence in this case amount to

27 outrageous behavior that is not tolerated in our civilized society and community. 28
COMPLAINT 12

1 2 3

53. Defendants acts and omissions amount to gross negligence tantamount to willful, wanton, and reckless conduct against the interests of the Plaintiffs. 54. Defendants knew or should have known that their serious failure to use reasonable are

4 herein would results in damage to Plaintiffs. 5 6 7 8 9 55. Plaintiffs restate and re-allege each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 1 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION FOR BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY (AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS AND DOES 1-100)

10 through 54 above as if fully set forth herein. 11 56. By reason of the trust and confidence Plaintiffs placed in Defendants, and based on the

12 facts set forth above, Defendants owed Plaintiffs a fiduciary duty of loyalty and a duty to act in the utmost good faith in all aspects of their ownership, operation, and management of Rose 13 Hills. 14 57. Defendants breached their duties to Plaintiffs by committing the acts set forth above. As a 15 direct and proximate cause of the breach of fiduciary duties owed to Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs have 16 suffered damages in an amount to be proven at trial. 17 58. Defendants undertook the aforesaid illegal acts intentionally or with conscious disregard

18 of the rights of Plaintiffs, and did so with fraud, oppression and/or malice. This despicable conduct subjected Plaintiffs to cruel and unjust hardship so as to justify an award of punitive 19 damages in an amount sufficient to deter such wrongful conduct in the future. Accordingly, 20 Plaintiffs are entitled to punitive damages against Defendants in an amount to be determined at 21 trial. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS (AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS AND DOES 1-100)

59. Plaintiffs restate and re-allege each and every allegation in the paragraphs 1 through 58 as if fully set forth herein.
COMPLAINT 13

1 2

60. Defendants had a special duty to the Plaintiffs to care for the remains of the decedent by the very nature of the services they provide. Defendants breach of this duty caused severe

3 emotional distress to Plaintiffs. 4 61. Defendants assumed a duty to the Plaintiffs thereby creating a special relationship

5 obligating them to perform those services in the dignified and respectful manner the Plaintiffs expected from Defendants. Plaintiffs suffered severe emotional distress when Defendants 6 grossly mishandled and mistreated the remains of Plaintiffs Mother in ways unauthorized by 7 Plaintiffs, which were contrary to the wishes of the decedent, Plaintiffs, and their cultural 8 beliefs and traditions. Specifically, Defendants lost track of Plaintiffs mother, placed her in 9 the wrong casket, prepared and dressed her in a complete strangers clothes, and 10 horrifically presented her to the wrong family in an open casket funeral service, to be 11 mourned, touched, grieved, and then sacreligiously buried underground - violating her 12 lifelong cultural beliefs, superstitions, dying wishes, and personal convictions. Any and all quality checks and procedures totally failed, and Rose Hills inexplicably presented the 13 Plaintiffs Mother to another family inexplicably ignorant of their catastrophic failure to 14 check body identifications on either woman. 15 62. Plaintiffs are forever haunted by the vision of how a complete strangers family and 16 friends mourned, touched, kissed, and cried with Plaintiffs Mother, before sacrilegiously 17 burying her in a strangers plot. Like Plaintiffs, in the midst of their grief this strangers family 18 unconditionally trusted Rose Hills unfathomable misrepresentation that the woman placed in their Mothers open casket was their Mother, and not a total stranger dressed up in her clothes 19 and accessories. The fact not a single Defendant employee ever checked, verified, or even 20 questioned that strangers were morning and burying Plaintiffs Mother warrants punitive 21 damages. 22 63. Plaintiffs Mother was buried underground in a strangers grave under a strangers

23 tombstone for an appalling three rainy day and nights, sacrilegiously being violated of her 24 cultural beliefs and dying wish to never be buried underground. Plaintiffs were aware their entire lives how their Mother feared to the bone being buried underground, often saying: 25 26 27 28 Debe de ser muy frio y yo soy muy friolenta (it must be very cold and I am always cold). -Mercedes Adilia Rodriguez (1922-2010)
COMPLAINT 14

1 2

64. Three days after the wrongful burial, Rose Hills dug up Plaintiffs Mother in the middle of a rainy night, stripped the strangers clothes and accessories from her cold naked body, and 65. Rose Hills salesperson Carmen Blue intentionally further caused emotional distress

3 gave the other family a do-over funeral all concealed from Plaintiffs until after the fact. 4

5 under course and scope of her employment with Rose Hills, when she intentionally disregarded the plea from the husband of Daughter Marielena not to communicate the revelation to the 6 family over the phone. Carmen Blue caused even further emotional distress when she met with 7 the Plaintiffs and offered her outrageous response to this unlawful incompetence by telling the 8 Plaintiffs: 9 10 11 12 13 14 66. This statement of optional disclosure further adds to the Plaintiffs painful and reoccurring visions and nightmares - realizing how shockingly close their Mothers soul was from being trapped underground in a strangers grave for eternity, never to be reunited to rest in 67. Furthermore, Plaintiffs repeated requests to speak with a manager or director of Rose Hills had no obligation to notify the family as to what happened, but they felt it was the right thing to do.

15 peace with her loved ones in Nicaragua. 16

17 operations were ignored, only to later receive a letter from management self-proclaiming client 18 satisfaction for not charging Plaintiffs for the permanent devastation caused. 68. Defendants actions were not only a substantial factor in causing the severe emotional 19 distress suffered by Plaintiffs, they were the only factor causing the severe emotional distress 20 suffered by Plaintiffs resulting from egregious mistreatment of their Mothers remains. 21 69. The emotional devastation suffered by Plaintiffs is undeniable. Plaintiffs have 22 describe their pain as feelings of horror, anger, humiliation, disrespect, emotional 23 devastation, constant nightmares, ongoing feelings of being violated, anxiety attacks, 24 trouble sleeping, difficulty concentrating, unbearable mental anguish and pain, failure to grieve or recover, a sense of failure to their mother, and so much turmoil that even divorce 25 was contemplated by one of the plaintiffs. 26 70. No reasonable person, normally constituted, would be able to cope with the type of 27 mental stress and anguish caused by the present actions of the Defendants. Defendants conduct 28 COMPLAINT
15

1 2 3

as described herein was extreme and outrageous, and was so extreme as to exceed all bounds of that usually tolerated in a civilized society. 71. Plaintiffs suffered and continue to suffer from severe or extreme emotional distress,

4 which was actually and proximately caused by the Defendants outrageous conduct as set for 5 herein. 72. Accordingly, Plaintiffs are entitled to punitive damages against Defendants in an amount 6 to be determined at trial. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 73. Plaintiffs restate and re-alleges each and every allegation in the paragraphs 1 through 72 as if fully set forth herein. 74. By reason of the relationship between Plaintiffs and the decedent, Plaintiffs were at all times herein mentioned entitled to control their deceased Mothers remains. 75. Defendants have intentionally, willfully, recklessly and/or negligently interfered with FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE WITH RIGHT TO DISPOSE OF REMAINS (AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS AND DOES 1-100)

16 Plaintiffs rights to control the remains of their deceased Mothers remains, contrary to the 17 wishes and beliefs of Plaintiffs and decedent, by committing the acts described herein. This 18 interference was intentional, willful, reckless and/or negligent in that Defendants actions herein are illegal, improper, and immoral in that Defendants failed to inform Plaintiffs of the acts 19 described herein prior to or immediately after committing the tortious activity. 20 76. Defendants disposition of human remains is and was repugnant, offensive, and insulting 21 to Plaintiffs, their beliefs, and a civilized society. Learning of Defendants conduct described 22 herein caused and continues to cause the Plaintiffs extreme mental anguish and disgust, 23 disturbing their peace of mind causing them to become permanently sick in the mind and body. 24 25 26 27 28 77. As a direct and proximate cause of the intentional, willful, reckless, and/or negligent acts of Defendants, Plaintiffs suffered and continue to suffer the economic and non-economic damages. 78. Defendants undertook the aforesaid illegal acts intentionally or with conscious disregard of the rights of Plaintiffs, and did so with fraud, oppression and/or malice. This despicable
COMPLAINT 16

1 2

conduct subjected Plaintiffs to cruel and unjust hardship so as to justify an award of punitive damages in an amount sufficient to deter such wrongful conduct in the future. Accordingly,

3 Plaintiffs are entitled to punitive damages against Defendants in an amount to be determined at 4 trial. 5 6 7 8 9 79. Plaintiffs restate and re-allege each and every allegation in the paragraphs 1 through 78 SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR TORTIOUS INTERERENCE WITH DEAD BODIES (AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS AND DOES 1-100)

10 as if fully set forth herein. 11 80. Defendants owed Plaintiffs a duty to exercise reasonable and proper care when handling 12 the remains of Plaintiffs Mother. The duties include, but are not limited to, those set forth in paragraph 46 above. 13 81. Defendants conduct of maliciously, intentionally, recklessly, or negligently removing, 14 withholding, mutilating, or operating upon the Plaintiffs Mother or preventing the proper burial 15 or cremation of the Plaintiffs Mother, in addition to the conduct described in the paragraphs 16 above, demonstrates a wanton disregard for care of or attention to their duties, and a callous 17 indifference to the remains, property and property rights of others. Defendants conduct is 18 outrageous and goes beyond all bounds of decency in a civilized society. 82. Defendants conduct has directly and proximately caused and continues to cause 19 economic and non-economic damages to Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs have and will continue to suffer 20 extreme mental anguish, distress and suffering. 21 83. Defendants could reasonably foresee that their wrongful acts and omissions would 22 damage the Plaintiffs in the manner set forth above. 23 84. Defendants undertook the aforesaid illegal acts intentionally or with conscious disregard

24 of the rights of the Plaintiffs, and did so with fraud, oppression and/or malice. This despicable conduct subjected Plaintiffs to cruel and unjust hardship so as to justify an award of punitive 25 damages in an amount sufficient to deter such wrongful conduct in the future. Accordingly, 26 Plaintiffs are entitled to punitive damages against Defendants in an amount to be determined at 27 trial. 28 COMPLAINT
17

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR EQUITABLE/INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS AND DOES 1-100)

85. Plaintiff restates and re-alleges each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 1 through 84 above as if fully set forth herein. 86. Plaintiffs request equitable and injunctive relief to ensure Defendants body identification procedures and processes and related services are overhauled, employees are properly trained to prevent the type of egregious errors committed by Defendants above, and to prevent further

9 immoral and/or unlawful practices akin to those described the paragraphs above. 10 87. Injunctive relief is in the public interest. The proper disposition of human remains is 11 sacred and is last moment for the decedents family and loved ones to pay their respects and lay 12 the decedent to rest in their final resting place. These matters are of the utmost importance once 13 14 a loved one has passed and the public has a strong interest in insuring that these matters are conducted properly. 88. The foregoing injunction is appropriate because, among other reasons, it is necessary to 15 insure that other decedents, with similar ethnic names, are properly laid to rest. Equity supports 16 the requested injunctive relief because Defendants committed the egregious acts described 17 above. 18 19 20 89. As a direct and proximate cause of the aforementioned wrongful acts and omissions by the Defendants, many other families will be uncertain as to the location and disposition of their family members remains and/or the remains of other decedents. Defendants conduct cannot and will not be abated without the requested injunction. There is no other adequate remedy at

21 law for this objective. 22 90. Plaintiffs request a permanent injunction that requires, among others, that Defendants

23 fund a court supervised program that provides for the inspection of records, evaluation of body 24 identification processing and procedures, and monitoring of Defendants business practices to ascertain whether the decedents interred at Defendants properties are interred in their intended 25 locations and under the correct name. 26 /// 27 /// 28 COMPLAINT
18

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR VIOLATION OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE 17200 ET. SEQ. (AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS AND DOES 1-100)

91. Plaintiffs restate and re-allege each and every allegation in paragraphs 1 through 90 as if fully set forth herein. 92. Defendants aforementioned conduct constitutes an unlawful business practice within the meaning of the California Unfair Competition Law, and violates numerous other California statutes, including but not limited to: a) Health & Safety Code 7051, by removing parts of human remains from places where they have been interred, and doing so with malice and wantonness. b) Health & Safety Code 7500 et seq., by removing the remains of a deceased person from a cemetery without the requisite legal authorization and consent. c) Business & Professions Code 7735.5, by not clearly stating in preneed funeral contracts that competent services were unavailable or limited by the patterns and practices of Defendants described above. d) Business & Professions Code 9725.1, for violating or attempting to violate, directly or indirectly, or assisting in or abetting the violation of laws governing the disposition of human remains, operation of cemeteries, and/or the sale of cemetery property, and for negligence in performing acts related to the operation of a cemetery. e) California Civil Code 1709-1710 for misrepresenting, or failing to disclose, the patterns and practices of Defendants described above. 93. Defendants conduct in failing to disclose the above-described problems to Plaintiffs

21 described above also constitutes a fraudulent business practice within the meaning of the 22 California Unfair Competition Law. 23 24 25 26 27 28 /// /// /// /// /// ///
COMPLAINT 19

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

NINETH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR VIOLATIONS OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE 17500, ET. SEQ. (AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS AND DOES 1-100)

94. Plaintiffs restate and re-allege each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 1 through 1 and 93 above as if fully set forth herein. 95. Defendants made representations to Plaintiffs, including but not limited to, that the remains of loved ones would be handled in a dignified and respectful manner. These representations were made as part of a concerted and comprehensive effort by Defendants to

9 solicit the Plaintiffs and other unsuspecting families, to patronize the products and/or services 10 provided by Defendants. 11 96. The representations appear habitually in written documents, which were, on information

12 and belief, provided to Plaintiffs. These representations can also be found on the websites of Defendants and other written forms. In making representations to Plaintiffs, Defendants 13 concealed and failed to disclose their true practices as described above. The representations 14 and/or failures by Defendants to disclose such information were part of a continuing scheme 15 and ongoing campaign to falsify, mislead, or otherwise unlawfully advertise the products or 16 services of 17 97. Plaintiffs are informed and believe the affirmative representations made by Defendants

18 were false when made as Defendants did not believe them to be true when they were made and/or the representations were made with reckless disregard to truthfulness. As alleged above, 19 it was also the policy, practice, and intended program of Defendants to mishandle human 20 remains. Defendants SCI and Dignity were already engaging in undignified and disrespectful 21 acts around the nation, and were instructing their employees to exercise their options to conceal 22 those practices. 23 98. In addition to the representations of Defendants being false, the representations were also

24 misleading as they failed to disclose the described practices of Defendants in mistreating families and human remains. Defendants failed to disclose their gross misconduct conduct to the 25 Plaintiffs until after the fact, after more gross mishandling of their Mother occurred. 26 99. Defendants fraudulently failed to disclose that because they had a common last name, 27 Rodriguez, representations of a secure check and verification system were not applicable to the 28 COMPLAINT
20

1 2

family. Defendants further fraudulently concealed, and failed to disclose, that Plaintiffs mother was displayed at the wrong familys open casket funeral, buried underground in a strangers plot,

3 and then dug up in the middle of a rainy night. Defendants fraudulently failed to disclose this 4 information to the Plaintiffs until Defendants took independent, unauthorized, and illegal action 5 and after a third party was informed. All the actions taken by the Defendants were in diametrical opposition to the representations made by Defendants that they handled remains in a 6 dignified and respectful manner. 7 100. The fiduciary relationship and the relationship of trust and confidence between 8 Plaintiffs, on the one hand, and the Defendants, on the other, placed a higher standard on 9 Defendants to provide candid, honest, and forthright immediate communications to Plaintiffs, 10 including problems or inhumane conduct, disturbances, false services, religious violations, 11 breaches in the contract, within, and the overall practices and procedures engaged in by 12 Defendants to maintain the loved one in question. Without the Defendants upholding their duty, 13 14 the Plaintiffs would never be able to ascertain the materiality of the information. The material facts of the egregious error as well as the business information (including the various licenses they were required to hold) were solely within Defendants knowledge and could not have been 15 independently discovered by Plaintiffs. 16 101. Defendants consistently failed to make the material disclosures described above. Rather,

17 the only disclosures made by Defendants were the inaccurate representations that they were 18 committed to maintaining a beautiful and peaceful environment for [Plaintiffs] loved ones final resting place that will last for many generations to come and that Defendants Dignity 19 Memorial brand comes with an assurance of quality, value, caring service and exceptional 20 customer satisfaction. Service Corporation International is dedicated to compassionately 21 serving families at difficult times, celebrating the significance of lives that have been lived, and 22 preserving memories that transcend generations, with dignity and honor. 23 102. The most egregious and abhorrent of false representations is made by Rose Hills, which

24 markets aggressively to the very ethnic communities that appear to subjected to the most harm, Rose Hills Memorial Park & Mortuaries provides comprehensive memorial care to Los 25 Angeles County and Orange County families. We have expertise in the funeral and burial 26 traditions of many cultures, and our team is proud to offer assistance in English, Spanish, 27 Mandarin, Cantonese, Korean and Vietnamese. - Rose Hills 28 COMPLAINT
21

1 2

103. Like many culturally diverse and loving families in the areas of Rose Hills targeted markets, Plaintiffs trusted Rose Hills to understand and respect the critical importance of the

3 individuality of their loved one even after passing, deep rooted burial traditions, religions, and 4 superstitious beliefs that so many Southern California residents value to their core. 5 6 7 8 104. Nonetheless, in defiance of these duties, Defendants engaged in repeated acts of false advertising and wrongful conduct, as described above, to the material detriment of Plaintiffs, which were contrary to the very representations and the impressions Rose Hills marketed aggressively to portray to the public. 105. Defendants alleged advertising scheme of marketing selective representations described

9 herein was propagated with the intent to directly or indirectly mislead Plaintiffs and the general 10 public. These representations were in fact untrue and/or misleading and likely to deceive 11 Plaintiffs and the general public. In making and disseminating the statement(s) herein alleged, 12 Defendants knew, or by the exercise of reasonable care should have known, that the 13 14 statement(s) was/were untrue or misleading and so acted in violation of Business and Professions Code Section 17500. 106. Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at law, and unless the Defendants are restrained, 15 Defendants will continue to engage in untrue and misleading advertising, as alleged above, in 16 violation of Business and Professions Code Section 17500. 17 107. Plaintiffs material payment of money was a direct result of the aggressive false

18 advertising campaign engaged in by Defendants. Plaintiffs would not have paid had they known of the false advertising engaged in by Defendants. 19 108. Plaintiffs have also suffered material emotional distress and other damage due to the 20 false advertising conduct by Defendants. The material loss was caused directly by the acts of 21 Defendants in falsely advertising their products/services in question. Plaintiffs would never 22 have patronized the business of Defendants had they not been misled by Defendants false and 23 misleading advertising. 24 25 26 27 28
COMPLAINT 22

/// /// /// ///

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION FRAUD/CONCEALMENT/ NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION (AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS AND DOES 1-100)

109. Plaintiffs restate and re-allege each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 1 through 108 above as if fully set forth herein. 110. Defendants recklessly, and/or negligently represented, concealed and/or failed to disclose the material facts. Defendants representations described above were in fact false. Defendants do not provide dignified and respectful service to the decedent and Defendants do

9 not compassionately serve decedents families in their most difficult time of trying to celebrate 10 the significance of lives that have been lived, and preserving memories that transcend 11 generations, with dignity and honor. Defendants do not value or have expertise in the types 12 of sacred cultural burial traditions they purport to value and proudly claim on their websites. 13 14 Defendants accept the sacred responsibility of honoring cultural customs and traditions with false promises of competence, compassion, and care. Defendants services lack quality, value and caring for the reasons set forth above. Defendants statements were made with the intent to

15 deceive Plaintiffs. 16 111. Defendants made similar representations to Plaintiffs at the time Plaintiffs engaged 17 Defendants services. Plaintiffs were entirely ignorant of the falsity of the Defendants 18 representations and believed them to be true. Plaintiffs relied on Defendants representations and had Plaintiffs known of the known the actual facts, Plaintiffs would not have taken the 19 actions they did, including but not limited to entering a contract with Rose Hills, and entrusting 20 Defendants with the remains of their beloved Mother. 21 112. Defendants concealment and non-disclosure of material facts as set forth above were 22 made with the intent to induce the Plaintiffs to act in the manner herein alleged in reliance 23 thereon. Defendant Rose Hills concealed all ties with SCI, a company known for horrific 24 practices nationwide. 113. Plaintiffs reliance was justified and reasonable as they had no basis to doubt the 25 representations made to them, nor did they have reason to believe they were being misled or 26 that material facts were being concealed from them, including the history of horrific conduct by 27 SCI. 28 COMPLAINT
23

1 2

114. Plaintiffs reliance on Defendants representations were justified.

Defendants

concealments and non-disclosure of material facts as set forth above were made with the intent

3 to induce the Plaintiffs to act in the manner herein alleged in reliance thereon. Defendant Rose 4 Hills concealed all ties with SCI, a company known for horrific national conduct 5 6 7 8 115. Plaintiffs, at the time these failures to disclose the suppressions of facts occurred and at the time the Plaintiffs took the actions herein alleged, were ignorant of the existence of the facts that the Defendants suppressed and failed to disclose. If the Plaintiffs had known of Defendants concealments and failures to disclose material facts, they would not have taken the actions they did, including hiring Rose Hills and entrusting Defendants with the remains of

9 their Mother. 10 116. As a direct and proximate cause of the above, Plaintiffs have suffered economic and

11 non-economic damages in an amount to be proven at trial. 12 13 14 15 16 117. Plaintiffs restate and re-allege each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 1 ELEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR FRAUD/CONCEALMENT/ INTENTIONAL MISREPRESENTATION (AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS AND DOES 1-100)

17 through 116 above as if fully set forth herein. 18 19 20 118. Defendants intentionally concealed and/or failed to disclose the material facts. Defendants representations described above were in fact false. Defendants do not provide dignified and respectful service to the decedent and Defendants do not compassionately serve decedents families in their most difficult time when they are trying to celebrate the significance 21 of lives that have been lived, and preserving memories that transcend generations, with 22 dignity and honor. Defendants do not value or have expertise in the types of sacred cultural 23 burial traditions they purport to value and proudly claim on their websites. Defendants accept 24 the sacred responsibility of honoring cultural customs and traditions with false promises of competence, compassion, and care. Defendants services lack quality, value and caring for the 25 reasons set forth above. Defendants statements were made with the intent to deceive Plaintiffs. 26 119. Defendants made similar representations to Plaintiffs at the time Plaintiffs engaged 27 Defendants services. Plaintiffs were entirely ignorant of the falsity of Defendants 28 COMPLAINT
24

1 2

representations and believed them to be true. Plaintiffs relied on Defendants representations and had Plaintiffs known of the known the actual facts, Plaintiffs would not have taken the

3 actions they did, including but not limited to entering a contract with Rose Hills, and entrusting 4 Defendants with the remains of their beloved Mother. 5 6 7 8 120. Defendants concealment and non-disclosure of material facts as set forth above were made with the intent to induce the Plaintiffs to act in the manner herein alleged in reliance thereon. Defendant Rose Hills concealed all ties with SCI, a company known for horrific practices nationwide. 121. Plaintiffs reliance was justified and reasonable as they had no basis to doubt the

9 representations made to them, nor did they have reason to believe they were being misled or 10 that material facts were being concealed from them, including the history of horrific conduct by 11 SCI. Plaintiffs reliance on the Defendants representations was justified. 122. Plaintiffs, at the time these failures to disclose the suppressions of facts occurred and at 12 13 14 the time the Plaintiffs took the actions herein alleged, were ignorant of the existence of the facts that the Defendants suppressed and failed to disclose. If the Plaintiffs had known of Defendants concealments and failures to disclose material facts, they would not have taken the

15 actions they did, including hiring Rose Hills and entrusting Defendants with the remains of 16 their Mother. 17 123. As a direct and proximate cause of the above, Plaintiffs have suffered economic and

18 non-economic damages in an amount to be proven at trial. 124. Defendants undertook the aforesaid illegal acts intentionally or with conscious disregard 19 of the rights of Plaintiffs and did so with fraud, oppression and/or malice. This despicable 20 conduct subjected Plaintiffs to cruel and unjust hardship so as to justify an award of punitive 21 damages in an amount sufficient to deter such wrongful conduct in the future. Accordingly, 22 Plaintiffs are entitled to punitive damages against Defendants in an amount to be determined at 23 trial. 24 25 26 27 28
COMPLAINT 25

/// /// /// ///

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

TWELFTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT (AGAINST ROSE HILLS ONLY AND DOES 1-100)

125. Plaintiffs restate and re-allege each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 1 through 124 above as if fully set forth herein. 126. The contract upon which this action is based was made and was to be performed in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. 127. Plaintiffs entered into contract #440974 with Rose Hills on September 30, 2010 for the

9 preparation their Mothers remains for shipment to and burial in Granada, Nicaragua pursuant to 10 the last wishes of the decedent and the surviving family members. Plaintiffs agreed to a total 11 contract price of $8,120.26 for the casket, preparation services, transportation and other 12 necessary services to be performed by Rose Hills. 13 14 15 128. Plaintiffs performed all of the conditions, covenants and promises required by them to be performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the contract, by providing payment to Rose Hills for any and all balances owed under the contract. 129. Rose Hills breached the contract when they lost track of Plaintiffs mother, placed her in

16 the wrong casket, prepared and dressed her in a complete strangers clothes, and horrifically 17 presented her to the wrong family in an open casket funeral service, to be mourned, touched, 18 grieved, and then sacrilegiously buried underground - violating her lifelong cultural beliefs, superstitions, dying wishes, and personal convictions. Any and all quality checks and 19 procedures totally failed, and Rose Hills inexplicably presented the Plaintiffs Mother to another 20 family inexplicably ignorant of their catastrophic failure to check body identifications on either 21 woman. 22 130. Rose Hills breached their contract with Plaintiffs, who have been damaged thereby in

23 the sum of $8,120.26 plus interest at the legal rate from and after the date due according to 24 proof. /// 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28

COMPLAINT 26

1 2 3

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against Defendants, and each of them, as

4 follows: 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ON THE THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION FOR BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

COMPLAINT 27

ON THE FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION FOR INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS a. For damages with the exact amount to be proven at trial; b. For punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish the Defendants and to deter them from engaging in wrongful conduct in the future; c. An award of suitable equitable, injunctive and/or declaratory relief; d. For costs of suit incurred herein; e. For attorneys fees incurred herein; and f. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

ON THE SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION FOR NEGLIGENCE a. For damages with the exact amount to be proven at trial; b. For interest and costs of suit incurred herein; c. For attorneys fees incurred herein; and d. For such other and further equitable relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

a. For damages with the exact amount to be proven at trial; b. For punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish the Defendants and to deter them from engaging in wrongful conduct in the future; c. An award of suitable equitable, injunctive and/or declaratory relief; d. For costs of suit incurred herein; e. For attorneys fees incurred herein; and f. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

ON THE FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS a. For damages with the exact amount to be proven at trial; b. For punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish the Defendants and to deter them from engaging in wrongful conduct in the future; c. An award of suitable equitable, injunctive and/or declaratory relief; d. For costs of suit incurred herein; e. For attorneys fees incurred herein; and f. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

ON THE FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR TORTIOUS INTERERENCE WITH RIGHT

11 TO DISPOSE OF REMAINS a. For damages with the exact amount to be proven at trial; 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
COMPLAINT 28

b. For punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish the Defendants and to deter them from engaging in wrongful conduct in the future; c. An award of suitable equitable, injunctive and/or declaratory relief; d. For costs of suit incurred herein; e. For attorneys fees incurred herein; and f. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

ON THE SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE WITH DEAD BODIES a. For damages with the exact amount to be proven at trial; b. For punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish the Defendants and to deter them from engaging in wrongful conduct in the future; c. An award of suitable equitable, injunctive and/or declaratory relief; d. For costs of suit incurred herein; e. For attorneys fees incurred herein; and f. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. ///

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

ON THE SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR EQUITABLE/INJUNCTIVE RELIEF a. For damages and/or restitution, with the exact amount to be proven at trial; b. An award of suitable equitable, injunctive and declaratory relief; c. For interest and costs of suit incurred herein; d. For attorneys fees incurred herein; and e. For such other and further equitable relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

ON EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR VIOLATIONS OF BUSINESS & PROFESSIONS CODE SECTION 17200 a. For damages and/or restitution, with the exact amount to be proven at trial; b. For punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish the Defendants and to deter them from engaging in wrongful conduct in the future; c. An award of suitable equitable, injunctive and/or declaratory relief; d. For costs of suit incurred herein; e. For attorneys fees incurred herein; and f. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

ON NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR VIOLATIONS OF BUSINESS & PROFESSIONS

17 CODE SECTIOM 17500 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 /// /// 25 /// 26 /// 27 28

COMPLAINT 29

a. For damages and/or restitution, with the exact amount to be proven at trial; b. For punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish the Defendants and to deter them from engaging in wrongful conduct in the future; c. An award of suitable equitable, injunctive and/or declaratory relief; d. For costs of suit incurred herein; e. For attorneys fees incurred herein; and f. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

ON TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR FRAUD/CONCEALMENT/NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION a. For damages and/or restitution, with the exact amount to be proven at trial; b. For punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish the Defendants and to deter them from engaging in wrongful conduct in the future; c. An award of suitable equitable, injunctive and/or declaratory relief; d. For costs of suit incurred herein; e. For attorneys fees incurred herein; and f. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

ON ELEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR FRAUD/CONCEALMENT/ INTENTIONAL

11 MISREPRESENTATION a. For damages and/or restitution, with the exact amount to be proven at trial; 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
COMPLAINT 30

b. For punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish the Defendants and to deter them from engaging in wrongful conduct in the future; c. An award of suitable equitable, injunctive and/or declaratory relief; d. For costs of suit incurred herein; e. For attorneys fees incurred herein; and f. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

ON TWELFTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT a. For damages with the exact amount to be proven at trial; b. For punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish the Defendants and to deter them from engaging in wrongful conduct in the future; c. For costs of suit incurred herein; d. For attorneys fees incurred herein; and e. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.