Negligence - Proof and Probability: Res Ipsa Loquitur

Question 1

What is the Res Ipsa Loquitur rule?

Answer 1

1. The accident must be of a kind that ordinarily does not occur in the absence of someone’s negligence. RIL permits the use of general evidence to establish the specific negligence of the defendant. (Not Ordinary)
2. It must be caused by an agency or instrumentality within the exclusive control of the defendant. Exclusive control may involve either physical possession or legal responsibility (ownership of the plane in Newing). (Defendant in control?)
3. It must not have been due to any voluntary act or contribution – i.e., causal precipitation – on the part of the plaintiff. (Plaintiff contribution?)

Question 2

What is the majority view for RIL?

Answer 2

Inference of negligence: res ipsa is basis only for an inference of negligence – i.e., a conclusion that the trier of fact may choose to draw from the facts in light of circumstances. There are no directed verdicts – it always goes to the jury.

Question 3

What is the minority view for RIL?

Answer 3

Presumption of Negligence: Res ipsa creates a presumption of negligence whereby the defendant loses by directed verdict if they don’t produce at least some evidence. If defendant produces evidence, jury weighs presumption against that evidence.

Question 4

What is direct evidence?

Answer 4

Evidence that supports an asserted fact without requiring an inference to be made between the evidence and the fact.

See it snowing at night.

Question 5

What is circumstantial evidence?

Answer 5

Evidence that tends to prove an asserted fact by proving other events or circumstances that, according to common human experience, usually or always attend the asserted fact, thereby supporting and inference that the asserted fact is true.

Question 6

What is general evidence?

Answer 6

Widely accepted ideas or well-known facts. 68% of airplane
accidents are the result of pilot error

Question 7

What is specific evidence?

Answer 7

Actual facts of the case. Pilot did not lower landing gear.

Question 8

What is reasonable inference?

Answer 8

Conclusions which are regarded as logical by reasonable people in the light of their experience in life.

The paint on defendant’s bumper matches the paint on my
recently dented car.

Question 9

What is conjecture?

Answer 9

An explanation that, although consistent with the facts and evidence, is not deducible from them as a reasonable inference.

my car was dented while parked in a lot where defendant’s car was parked with other cars