Res Ipsa Loquitur


Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Medical, Legal, Acronyms, Wikipedia.

Res Ipsa Loquitur

The legal concept that some acts are so obviously negligent that no further explanation is necessary to prove legal liability. A res ipsa loquitur case ordinarily requires one to show that an act usually would not occur without negligence, that the act probably was the result of negligence, that the defendant caused the negligence, and that the plaintiff did not contribute to it. A res ipsa loquiture case contrasts with a prima facie case, which requires more evidence to prove liability. The phrase "res ipsa loquitur" is Latin for "the thing speaks for itself."
Mentioned in ?
References in periodicals archive ?
birth of res ipsa loquitur within the larger historical narrative of
In 1990, the Texas Supreme Court addressed the applicability of res ipsa loquitur in medical malpractice cases.
LEGAL COMMENTARY: The Doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitur has been described by the court as follows: "Res Ipsa Loquitur is a doctrine addressed to those situations where the facts or circumstances accompanying an injury by their very nature raise a presumption of negligence on the part of [a] defendant.
Dean, breach of contract, Res Ipsa Loquitur (RIL), and breach of informed consent.
In addition, the court found that the plaintiffs failed to satisfy the elements for the application of the doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitur (RIL).
Subsequently, the plaintiff argued for leave to file a count relying on the doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitur (RIL).
The court further noted that there is a "common knowledge" exception to the Affidavit of Merit Statute in that no affidavit of a medical expert is required in cases in which the plaintiff intends to rely upon the application of the Doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitur.
It is respectfully submitted that not all courts would have decided this case as the Washington courts did The case fails to indicate whether the plaintiffs attempted to argue that the doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitur was applicable in this case (assuming that the doctrine or something analogous to it is recognized under Washington law.
Whether the trial court erroneously failed to submit the plaintiffs request for a charge that the doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitur (RIL) applied.
The court rejected the plaintiffs' contention in this regard since the case was far from one even close to approaching the type of case to which the well-known doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitur (RIL) would be applicable.
Subsequently, the patient brought suit against the hospital alleging negligence and specifically pleading that the doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitur (RIL) was applicable.
The court rejected the patient's contention that the doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitur (RIL) was applicable in this case.