Historically, Brooklyn's Green-Wood cemetery has been selected as the final resting place for many buzz-worthy people, such as composer Leonard Bernstein, newspaperman Horace Greeley, "Wizard of Oz" actor Frank Morgan and artist Jean-Michel Basquiat. But, of late, Green-Wood has some new, lively residents, over 600,000 honeybees. These bees are responsible for producing the locally acclaimed honey named, "The Sweet Hereafter," which is sold from a wheeled cart outside the cemetery's gothic gate.
Up until 2010, New York City had a ban on beekeeping. But, one day in 2014, while sitting in Green-Wood's central chapel, Davin Larson, who worked with bees while growing up in the Midwest, came up with the idea to keep beehives onsite. Green-Wood and its sprawling 478 acres of greenery is one of the larger green areas in New York City, which seemed like an ideal location to keep bees within the limits of the city. Larson proposed his idea to a cemetery volunteer and backyard beekeeper, Nicole Francis, who then sold the concept to the cemetery's public programming director. Larson was originally concerned that families who have relatives buried at the cemetery would object to the idea, but he says, "they've been nothing but supportive."
The bees not only produce lots of honey, this year alone the beekeepers harvested 200 pounds of honey, but also help to beautify the landscape by pollinating tons of flowering plants and trees. Larson did not want to interrupt the surrounding landscape when installing the hives, so with some innovation, he propped up the hives on excess, uncarved headstones that were previously stored in the cemetery's workshop to make them appear almost as grave markers. But, maintaining the hives can be expensive, so supporters of the beekeeping are encouraged to make donations on the Green-Wood website to sponsor hives and efforts of Larson: $500 for one hive, or $250 for half a hive. This is the second year that Green-Wood has produced honey. The honey from this year's harvest is for sale the weekend of November 12-14 outside the main entrance of the cemetery. Overall, the community seems to enjoy the idea of having locally produced honey and regards the efforts of Larson as the "Bee's Knees."
The final resting place of celebrities who created a buzz when they were alive, is now the home to some 600,000 honeybees and a beekeeping operation that continue the buzz between the tombstones. Brooklyn's Green-Wood Cemetery allows beekeeper Davin Larson to run the beekeeping operation on the cemetery grounds near 500 acres of rolling hills. Upon visiting the cemetery, Larson knew that the grounds were the perfect place to keep bees in the city; the cemetery is one of the larger green areas in the city.
Green-Wood Cemetery is also granting Larson to sell the churned out honey outside of the cemetery's Gothic main gate under the name "The Sweet Hereafter." Larson was able to achieve this dream by proposing the idea to fellow beekeeper, and cemetery volunteer, Nicole Francis who sold the concept to the cemetery's public programming director.
The relationship is mutual between the cemetery and the beekeeping operation. Today, the bees help pollinate the cemetery's tons of flowering plants and trees. Along with keeping the grounds healthy, the cemetery has allowed individuals to sponsor hives to help defray the cost of maintaining the hives. In order for the bees to build honeycombs, they feed on sugar water. However, for the bees to obtain sugar water in the winter months, Larson had to buy 400 pounds of sugar this year to meet the bees needs to produce honeycombs. Maintaining these hives is not cheap and if you wish to sponsor a hive, you may make a donation of $500 to sponsor a hive, or $250 for halve a hive.
Green-Wood's beekeepers have harvested 200 pounds of honey already this year. As business is booming the question becomes whether or not the public or relatives of those buried in the cemetery minded the bees company. “I was concerned people who have relatives buried in Green-Wood would object, but they’ve been nothing but supportive,” Larson said.
Throughout modern history, funeral directors have been overwhelmingly male. In the 1970s, almost 90% of funeral directors in the United States were men, as was the norm in many industries. However, this industry has recently made a dramatic shift. According to the National Funeral Directors Association, 16.5% of its members were women. While this does not seem like a large majority, the number of women in mortuary study programs – the course of study required to be a funeral director – is rapidly growing. In 1971, only 5% of mortuary science students were women. In 1991, that number jumped to around 30%. Today, nearly 60% of all mortuary science students are women – a sign that the major demographic changes are on the horizon for the funeral industry.
Industry leaders attribute this development to a few things. First, Dr. Joseph Marsaglia – dean of students at the Pittsburgh Institute of Mortuary Science – credits the changing societal attitudes of woman who work in traditional male-dominated fields. Historically, women were the typical caretakers of the dying and the dead. However, once undertaking became a profession, men took over the job. This was mainly because surgeons became the primary embalmers of dead bodies, and medicine has been another historically male-dominated industry. In more modern times, some people believed women were incapable of being funeral directors because of the “heavy lifting” that was required in order to move caskets or lift bodies. But frankly, that is just not true. According to Joseph Salandra, a funeral home owner from Pennsylvania, “[W]omen can do everything – dressing, embalming, lifting caskets, cosmetology, and, the most important thing, meeting with and comforting families.” Therefore, it is no surprise that women are on their way to dominating the industry.
Another reason the number of the women in the funeral industry has increased dramatically is because the number of funeral director positions has also increased. The Bureau of Labor Statistics has recently reported that the funeral industry is expected to grow approximately 12% in the next decade. Matt Buel – director of funeral science program at Arkansas State University – stated because “the death rate will continue to go up” and the number of future funeral directors is not rising to meet this demand, there are more vacant funeral industry positions than ever. “A lot of funeral directors literally die in their profession.”
This change also reflects the shrinking number of family-owned funeral homes. The Funeral Consumers Alliance that corporate funeral homes are dominating the industry, with the leader being Service Corporation, International owning around 12% of funeral homes in the country. This opens up a number of new positions for the increasing number of female mortuary studies students. Women rising in the ranks of a male dominated field is something very encouraging to see as a woman entering an industry with a similar male demographic. While glass ceilings may not be breaking, women are making impressive progress.
You would think there would be some accountability in death.
As most states do, South Carolina has a cemetery board. Established by the South Carolina Perpetual Care Cemetery Act, the Board has the power and duty to promulgate regulations of the state’s cemeteries, as per §48-8-20, with some exceptions (e.g., governmental cemeteries). The Act seems fairly rigid in its rules: no company may operate a cemetery without a license from the Board; the company must follow detailed guidelines in establishing a perpetual care trust fund; and the Board has the authority to take disciplinary against a licensee who violates any of the provisions.
In theory, the Board would hold Steve Kent, owner of the Barnwell County Memory Gardens and Bamberg County Memory Gardens, accountable for the reported overgrown and unkempt conditions of the gravesites in his cemeteries. In practice, it appears that the Board has been unable to enforce action against Kent ever since it revoked his cemetery licenses for not turning over financial records, which is required by law. Once the Board revokes a license, it is no longer responsible for monitoring the cemetery’s conditions. As one perceptive cemetery owner speculated, if her license is revoked, she can pretty much operate her cemetery in any way she sees fit and can throw out the rule book.
Well, as the Deputy Director of Professional & Occupational Licensing most likely was quick to note, there are other recourses to hold these cemetery violators accountable. The SC Perpetual Care Cemetery Board filed action against Steve Kent in the SC Administrative Law Court. After Kent willfully violated a Court Consent Order and a Court Contempt Order, the Court found that Kent remains in contempt for continuing to disobey its orders. The Court added $50,000 for the current finding of contempt to the previous $10,000 in sanctions. But in spite of all that, Kent has still not paid the fines and the cemetery is still a mess, although apparently it continues to operate.
So, what options are left for the despairing loved ones who have to trample overgrown weeds to pay respects to their departed? According to §6-1-35, the Preservation and protection of cemeteries Section of SC General Provisions of the Local Government, counties and municipalities are authorized to preserve and protect a cemetery that is not being maintained—but good luck getting that to be a priority. Then, there is always a tort action, but going back to the basic requirements of tort, is there a duty? Is there a special relationship between the families of the buried and the cemetery owner? What is the nature of the injury? Emotional distress? Or should a family member just trip and fall over the ill-maintained markers?
Business management author Tom Peters wrote, “If a window of opportunity appears, don’t pull down the shade.” Candice Nicole Hough took that advice to heart when she pried a window screen off the home of a Colorado widow who was away attending her husband’s funeral. While the widow grieved, Hough broke into the home and made off with $3,000 worth of jewelry and an assortment of credit cards and cash.
Police believe that the robbery was part of a larger scheme to use obituaries and death notices to target mourners attending funerals. District Attorney Dan Rubinstein asked the Mesa County judge to set a high cash bond, arguing that it is “hard to imagine more offensive behavior” than taking advantage of a funeral to rob a widow. Hough is being held on a $5,000 cash-only bond and faces several felony charges. She is due to appear in Mesa County court on November 15.
Hough was by no means the first burglar to find a window of opportunity in funerals. In 2008, a Kansas City criminal dubbed the “Funeral Day Burglar” was handed a 43-year prison sentence following his conviction for one count of first-degree burglary, four counts of second-degree burglary, and five counts of stealing. Like Hough, the Funeral Day Burglar used obituaries to single out homeowners who would be away at funeral services. Prosecutor Eric Zahnd said, “Four decades in prison is an appropriate sentence for this series of outrageous crimes.”
As far as robberies go, using obituaries to identify empty homes is fairly creative. But is there any way to close the window of opportunity and protect grieving homeowners from more sorrow? Probably not, given the ubiquitous use of obituaries and death notices to publish information about funeral services. Particulars like date, time, and location are as crucial to mourners as they are to burglars, and leaving these details out of obituaries threatens the result of poorly-attended services. Unless the public embarks on a collective departure away from the practice of publishing obituaries, it seems like the window will remain open for the foreseeable future.
Outside of Washington, D.C., construction on a new interchange is encroaching on a marked slave cemetery. Residents in Loudoun County, Virginia, are worried about the new construction on the interchange between Belmont Ridge Road and Route 7. These residents have been restoring and protecting the cemetery as an integral part of Loudoun County's history.
Pastor Michelle Thomas of the Loudoun Freedom Center is one of the cemetery's biggest advocates. The mission of the Center is to "eliminate injustice and engender hope, understanding, and reconciliation . . . as it relates to the lives & contributions of the enslaved . . . who may be buried throughout Loudoun County." Thomas and residents in the area discovered that the construction moved the cemetery's fence line, and some digging had occured.
In the course of construction, trees that protect marked and unmarked graves were removed. These trees protect the cemetery from erosion and vandalism. Virginia Code §18.2-127 makes purposeful destruction of cemeteries and burial grounds a criminal act. It is even a felony to destroy or damage marked gravestones. These statutes do give the residents of Loudoun County and the Center a legal remedy for any damages to the cemetery, but would essentially require a neighborhood watch after the removal of the trees.
Although a spokesman for the county assured residents that the cemetery will remain undisturbed, residents are still worried. The County promises to monitor the area for those trying to disturb the remains, but the nearby residents are remaining vigilent. These guardians of the slave cemetery wish to ensure that the dignity and respect they've worked so hard to restore remains intact.
After just six minutes of deliberation a jury found a Pennsylvania man guilty of first-degree murder and abuse of a corpse. The man killed is stepdaughter, had sex with her corpse, and filmed it.
The stepdaughter's husband is suing the man for infliction of severe emotional distress on the husband and children. The husband is attempting to recover the cost of his wife's funeral, compensation for her lost wages, retirement benefits and punitive damages. As well as, the family's mental health counseling.
Generally, courts in Pennsylvania and most jurisdictions apply the impact rule when deciding to award damages for emotional distress. The “impact rule,” bars recovery for fright, nervous shock or mental or emotional distress unless it was accompanied by a physical injury on the complaining party. Kazatsky v. King David Memorial Park, Inc., 515 Pa. 183, 191 (1987).
Pennsylvania Courts allow for an exception to the impact rule if the individual claiming distress was in the zone of danger. The "zone of danger rule" allows for a party to recover damages for emotional distress if the plaintiff was in personal danger and feared impact of harm created by the negligent of internal acts of the defendant. Niederman v. Brodsky, 436 Pa. 401 (1970).
However, the Kazatasky court adopted the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress by outrageous conduct, which could allow for a family member to recover for distress if the defendant's conduct was sufficiently outrages. Kazatsky, 515 Pa. at 195. In order for the family member to recover for this tort the family member must show the defendant's conduct was "so outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency, and to be regarded as atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized community." Id.
In Kazatasky the parents attempted to recover for intentional infliction of emotional distress by outrageous conduct against a cemetery for failing to care for parent's children gravesites. Id. The court did not decided the case due to insufficient medical records but made it clear that if a plaintiff can pass the "outrageous" test the plantiff can recover for the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress by outrageous conduct. In the case of the murdered stepdaughter, the husband could recover for emotional distress if a court or jury views killing someone, having sex with their corpse, and filming it outrageous enough to go beyond all possible bounds of decency.
Correll L. Kennedy
Dear Bruce Perkins (if that is your real name),
The first sign that your ridiculous scam involving "purchasing" five seagrass caskets and shipping them to Denmark was going to fail? You tried to pull it on Caitlin Doughty and Amber Carvaly. The former has mad social media access, and the latter is apparently a bad ass when dealing with scammers.
Good cautionary tale for the rest of us - not all scammers are pretending to be Nigerian princes online.
Attention Funeral Law Blog readers, this post has absolutely nothing to do with funeral and cemetery law.
Fellow Avett Brothers fans, I think that the evolution of November Blue perfectly illustrates the evolution of this band from 2002 - 2016. "Ultimate" is in no way "complete." There are lots of videos out there. I tried to pick representative samples from each year. I couldn't find any videos from 2003-2005, so if you have links or audio files, or other suggestions for good versions, please comment. Unbelievable thanks for all of those who recorded shows and posted them for us to enjoy, especially SundayRehab, Cincynorsefan, and DCRANGERFAN.
Studio version: Country Was (2002) (link to the official video)