The emptying of the grave site ends long-running litigation involving the nation’s largest funeral company and a prominent Oregon family.
By Nigel Jaquiss
Oregon Journalism Project
A long-running dispute over a West Hills burial plot reached a dramatic conclusion over the holidays.
On Dec. 12, a Multnomah County circuit judge ruled that although Skyline Memorial Gardens in Northwest Portland had erroneously sold the same burial plot twice, the first purchasers, Martin and Jane Reser, were entitled to sole possession of the disputed plot.
“Only one party (or family) can have the rights to the plot, and the court has found that the Resers have ownership,” Judge Pro Tem Eric Neiman wrote.
The Resers are a prominent family in Oregon: Reser Fine Foods is one of the nation’s largest privately owned suppliers of prepared foods, and the family’s philanthropy earned it naming rights to the Oregon State University football stadium and a performing arts center in Beaverton. In 2019, the Resers purchased the plot, where they buried their recently deceased son, Alexander. They also purchased an adjacent plot where they planned to install a bench for visitors. But in 2021, before the Resers installed the bench, Skyline inadvertently sold the same plot to Paula Tin Nyo.
Tin Nyo purchased the plot as a final resting place for her late son, Tyber Harrison, who’d been killed in a Florida car crash and cremated.
Tin Nyo subsequently placed some of her son’s effects, including snippets of hair and baby teeth, in a vault in the plot. Not long after, Skyline, which is owned by Service Corporation International, the publicly-traded funeral giant, learned of its error and asked Tin Nyo to remove her son’s remains and accept another burial plot. Tin Nyo refused and the company sued her in 2023. After numerous twists and turns, the case finally came to a resolution this month.
“This court is acutely aware of the strong public and social policy, described by the Oregon Supreme Court ‘in the undisturbed rest of the dead,’” Neiman wrote in his decision. “Ordering removal of [Tin Nyo’s] a memorial vault is not something that can be done lightly but the parties have not identified any compromise solution that could serve as an equitable remedy.”
Ten days after Neiman’s ruling, which related to motions for summary judgment, a trial convened on Tin Nyo’s separate claim that Skyline had breached its contract with her.
A jury found against Tin Nyo on Dec. 22, which meant she would have to move her son’s remains.
“We are deeply disappointed in the verdict and wish we could have given the jury whatever it needed to do the right thing,” said Darian Stanford, one of the attorneys at Tonkon Torp LLP, which represented Tin Nyo.
The court ordered that Tin Nyo vacate the disputed plot Dec. 30, a decision she bitterly opposed.
“This grave is not simply a location of remains,” Tin Nyo said after the ruling. “It is a completed mourning ritual and a place where my son’s life was anchored to the land. Disturbing it would undo something that cannot be repaired.”
Tin Nyo sought an emergency stay from the court to block the removal of her son’s remains. But on Dec. 29, the court rejected her request. Tin Nyo removed her son’s remains from the burial vault on Dec. 30, an action she says caused “irreversible harm.”
Attorneys for Skyline and the Resers did not respond to requests for comment.