UC Irvine Is Sued by Body Donor’s Family

A north Tustin man filed a lawsuit Monday against UC Irvine, claiming that his mother’s body, donated for education and research, instead may have been sold for personal profit or otherwise mishandled.

Coming just 10 days after the public first learned of an investigation over alleged mishandling of body parts at UC Irvine, the suit seeks to become a class action on behalf of other families of people who willed their bodies to the university.

Newport Beach attorney Federico Castelan Sayre--whose past clients have included Rodney G. King and victims of the 1984 disaster in Bhopal, India--filed the suit on behalf of Robert Simpson and his father. The younger Simpson said he donated his mother’s body, according to her wishes, to UC Irvine’s Willed Body Program last year.

While there is no evidence that Lorraine Simpson’s body was in any way mishandled, Sayre said the Simpsons and other families are distressed by news of the investigation.

The Willed Body Program’s director was fired, effective Friday, amid suspicion that he had business ties to companies that profited from the program. Gaps in record keeping also make it difficult to tell if remains of some bodies donated to the program were properly disposed of, university officials say.

The younger Simpson, a 56-year-old family therapist, said that filing a lawsuit is the best way to find out what happened to his mother, who died at 81 after a stroke.

Simpson said memories of his spirited, redheaded mother painting seascapes from her Laguna Beach home have been marred by questions about what happened to her corpse.

“We don’t know what’s happened--that’s what prompted me to file a lawsuit,” Simpson said Monday. “I don’t know if her body was split up, parts sold here and there. They’re supposed to be cremating remains when they’re done using her body and scattering them [at sea] or returning them. But how will I ever know it’s her? Or if it’s parts of her and someone else?. . . . I feel like I’ve betrayed her.”

Simpson said he called the university to find out what happened to his mother’s ashes after news of the investigation broke, but hung up when he was referred to the university’s public information office.

The suit, filed in Superior Court in Santa Ana, contends that UC Irvine, former program director Christopher S. Brown and companies affiliated with Brown may have allowed bodies to be sold for private gain, rather than the public good, improperly disposed of cremated remains or mixed-up ashes, and failed to monitor the use of bodies donated for science. The complaint does not specify a sum for damages.

UC Irvine officials declined to discuss the suit. A lawyer for Brown, Stephen Warren Solomon, said he sympathizes with those concerned about their deceased family members. But “my client’s position is that everything is accounted for and that nothing inappropriate was done by him,” he said. “I can’t comment on the actions of another lawyer, but I think this adds more fuel to a fire when calm and reason should prevail.”

Sayre hopes that a judge will certify the suit as a class action, allowing the Simpsons to represent other families who have complaints about the program.

Sayre said he has talked to two other families about the class-action suit, including the lawyer representing relatives of Vincent Craig, who donated his body to the program in 1995.

Craig’s family has since sued UC Irvine in Superior Court, contending that the man’s remains were not returned to the family as requested. Instead, they allegedly were disposed of without consulting the family.

One legal expert said the case, if it proceeds, may hinge on waivers signed by people donating their bodies to science.

At UC Irvine, donors are supposed to sign a form authorizing the use of cadavers for “teaching purposes, scientific research or any other purposes deemed advisable by the university or its authorized representatives.”

Another key point will be if the Simpsons can establish that anything improper happened to Lorraine Simpson’s remains, said Alan Calnan, a professor specializing in torts and product liability at Southwestern University School of Law in Los Angeles.

“I don’t think the claim itself is shaky,” Calnan said. “The mishandling of corpses is a long-standing, well-recognized doctrine for sustaining claims of emotional distress. That part of it is very solid. It sounds like the underlying facts of this case are still questionable.”