Res Ipsa Loquitor Flashcards
Airplane crashes
Historically RIL.
Def gets all benefit, all risk on Pltf.
Theory of RIL may be invoked when:
1) the event wouldn’t occur absent negligence
2) other possible causes are eliminated by the evidence, including plntf’s conduct and 3rd persons
3) indicated negligence is within scope of the defendants duty to plaintiff
Exclusive control can be sufficient control if joint.
Commonalities of RIL &SPL.
Plaintiff in condition of ignorance,not know how it happened.
SPL- def. got all benefit of his danger. activity & all the risk was on plt.
SL-fault doesn’t matter
RIL- def at fault but doesn’t know how(evidence theory) allows jury to draw inference of fault.
S/L=COA, RIL is not
Like neg per se in that……
Once u put in juries mind you can’t really get it out
Possible COA for cattle on rd
Neg
Neg per se
Neg, RIL
Jury inference
Practically shifts burden on def. To prove didn’t
Defense tactics
Paint another possible actor to shed doubt on def,
Argue didn’t have exclusive control
Common res ipsa
Med mal.
Pltf can’t prove what went wrong,
Can sue only those that were in exclusive/sufficient control
Is RIL mandatory?
No is permissive. Ct decides when to give jury instruction as a matter of law
How does RIL get erased?
By statute, cuz it’s a common law doctrine.
If Pltf can prove neg thru conventional means…….?
then no longer avail for RIL.
At times won’t be until trial til you get rid of it.
Earlier Pltf wins on RIL the better
If there is direct evidence of of the cause of injury ?
Then ct will not allow the res ipsa theory.
Commonly goes to the evidentiary question of ______?
Breach
Dullard v. Berkeley assoc (1979)
uS ct of appeals
Wrongful death construction worker 4x4 timber.
Contracted & sub “shared a common duty” so considered one actor for the exclusive control analysis.
Applies RIL w/out violating exclusive control.
Just cuz multiple defendants will RIL fail?
No, joint activity/concerted effort, “shared a common duty”- all one actor for analysis.
How to get it in court.
pleaded in complaint, it looks like a COA, but it’s not, will be alternative to conventional negligence. It’s a doctrine of evidence.
Difference between RIL & summer v. Tice?
RIL- know someone is responsible
Alternative liabilty- know someone is defin, not responsible
impact c/f has Res Ipsa?
should a big guy have been on the top bunk?
if defense shows pltf part negl. then looses RIL cuz pltf has to show all other possible causes are eliminated.
at c/l we wanted only bad actors liable, now willing to prove agnst anyone
or would prove another bad actor, but now can expand cuz of 876 theory.
Key procedural impact of RIL?
to preclude a directed verdict, because the inference question must be submitted to the jury!
Want case to go to jury……
do a good job showing RIL
Conclusions of law are ruled
de novo by appellate courts
conclusions of fact
left undisturbed by appellate courts
summers v. Tice
quail hunting guys. (*know someone def. NOT responsible, but can’t tell who)
When two defendants not acting together both serve as a proximate cause of a plaintiff’s injuries, both may be held liable for the full extent of the damage and the burden of proof shifts to each defendant to work out a fair apportionment of damages among themselves (not RIL, but know comparisons)
