Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
Committee weighs limits on mental‑anguish claims against funeral providers; industry says lawsuits threaten small operators
Loading...
Summary
The committee considered a substitute to Senate Bill 20,27 that would set statutory standards and a cap (in the substitute, increased to $250,000) for mental‑anguish claims arising from funeral service providers’ handling of human remains.
Senator Campbell explained a committee substitute to Senate Bill 20,27 that would amend the Civil Practice and Remedies Code to set standards and reasonable limitations for mental‑anguish claims related to the handling of human remains by funeral service providers. The substitute increased the statutory cap discussed in the draft from $50,000 to $250,000 and narrowed the covered claims to those meeting a heightened mental‑anguish standard, while preserving other legal remedies.
Funeral‑industry witnesses — including long‑time local funeral directors and trade organizations — urged the committee to adopt the measure to protect small, community funeral homes. Lee Parsley of Texas for Lawsuit Reform said litigation tied to a Texas Supreme Court decision (Nelson v. SCI) had created uncertainty and insurance‑cost pressure for small firms. “These funeral homes are experiencing quite a lot of litigation and it’s driving their costs and it’s hurting many of the really small local business,” Parsley told the committee.
Kristen Tipps, presiding officer of the Texas Funeral Service Commission, described funeral professionals as “last responders” and urged protections similar to those other public‑health and emergency roles receive. Tipps said the industry faces rapidly rising insurance premiums and large deductibles: the commission’s witnesses said premiums and deductibles had increased dramatically (witnesses cited deductibles increasing to as high as $150,000 and insurer retrenchment), and several small funeral homes have filed bankruptcy this year, testimony said.
The Texas Trial Lawyers Association opposed the bill. Charlie Ginn, TTLA’s vice president for legislative affairs, told senators the bill would limit remedies for families harmed by severe mishandling — including cases in which bodies had been degraded or mishandled in ways that prevented closure. “We’re not talking about the exploitation of funeral homes; we’re talking about loved ones, who in their final time and seeking closure…when they open up a casket and the body had rotted,” Ginn said, referencing recent investigations. He argued the cap and the new limitations would often be insufficient where conduct was egregious.
Other witnesses — owners of multi‑location funeral homes and commissioners — described how high insurance premiums and litigation exposure influenced business decisions and access to local funeral services. Several senators pressed for balanced language that preserves accountability for gross misconduct while limiting nuisance suits that impose unsustainable costs on small operators.
Committee members asked witnesses for data and evidence about recent alleged mishandling incidents, regulatory enforcement outcomes, and the extent to which criminal or licensing sanctions had been pursued in reported cases. Witnesses said some investigations are ongoing and offered to provide details to the committee after the hearing.
After a lengthy panel with pro and con testimony, the committee left the substitute for Senate Bill 20,27 pending. Senators asked staff and stakeholders to provide additional documentation on recent incidents, insurance trends, and the practical effects of the proposed cap and standards.
