Res Ispa Liquotur/Causation

Question 1

Re ispa liquotur

Answer 1

When a plaintiff needs to state a claim of negligence when the mere fact of the occurrence infers negligence

Question 2

The plaintiff must prove that the defendant had exclusive control over the event that caused the damage

Answer 2

An element of RIL

Question 3

The general is that RIL can not be raised against multiple defendants

Answer 3

More than one person can not have exclusive to a singular claim under RIL

Question 4

Three types of RIL

Answer 4

1) Permits inference of negligence by the jury (majority approach to RIL)
2) It raises a presumption of negligence and the defendant must rebut this presumption or they will lose.
- raises a presumption of negligence.
3) Presumption of negligence AND Shifts the burden of proof.
- shifts the burden of proof

Question 5

Causation parts

Answer 5

Causation in fact
- Key question: if D’s negligent conduct caused injury
- But for the defendant’s breach, would the plaintiff’s injury have happened?

Question 6

Examples of Causation in fact rule applies.

Answer 6

“But for the car being made in a certain way, there would be no explosion. “

“But for the defendant’s speeding, the accident would not have happened.”

Question 7

Could a reasonably conclude that it is probable but for the defendant’s breach plaintiffs would not have been injured?

Answer 7

That is the cause in fact question you have to answer

Question 8

Causation can be hard to gather sufficient evidence to get to 51% certainty of causation in a case.

Answer 8

TROOF

Question 9

Cause in fact that leads to 100% compensation of the damage. When there is a negligent misdiagnosis.

Answer 9

If a reasonable jury can find cause in fact if they find Defendant’s breach was a substantial factor in causing a plaintiff’s death. Substantial factor can include less than fifty percent.
OR
Plaintiff must prove probable causation which means more likely than not.
OR
Loss of chance/increased risk
-

Question 10

Avo