Res Ipsa Loquitur
People hurt other people. Sometimes this hurt breaches a duty one person has to another. And sometimes we don't know for sure whether or not whoever hurt us breached any duty to us. We don't really know what happened. All we know is: we got hurt.
Judges usually require a plaintiff to establish the specific facts behind their hurt - to prove the defendant's breach. But sometimes the victim just don't know. And so the case ends before it even begins.
But judges can in certain special circumstances take the forced ignorance of victims into account. For example, consider a man who is simply walking along a street in the warehouse district, when suddenly a barrel of flour comes flying out of an upper storey window and lands on his head. What the hell? He doesn't have any idea what was going on inside the warehouse in the moments before the barrel flew out the window. A rotten rope? Horseplay?
The judge may forgive the victims ignorance by asking : First, is this the sort of accident that does not normally occur in the absence of negligence by someone? Second, if there is negligence, does this sort of accident normally happen because of negligence by someone in the position of the defendant?
If the answer to both questions is "yes" the judge may let the case go forward, and the jury can decide whether or not there is negligence in fact. This exception to the usual rule is a good example of the law's flexibility in pursuit of fairness.
But what lawyers really like about this doctrine is that it has such a cool name: Res Ipsa Loquitur. One moment, we are young and cocky, walking down the street. The next moment, a barrel of flour lands on our head. The Thing Speaks for Itself.
Judges usually require a plaintiff to establish the specific facts behind their hurt - to prove the defendant's breach. But sometimes the victim just don't know. And so the case ends before it even begins.
But judges can in certain special circumstances take the forced ignorance of victims into account. For example, consider a man who is simply walking along a street in the warehouse district, when suddenly a barrel of flour comes flying out of an upper storey window and lands on his head. What the hell? He doesn't have any idea what was going on inside the warehouse in the moments before the barrel flew out the window. A rotten rope? Horseplay?
The judge may forgive the victims ignorance by asking : First, is this the sort of accident that does not normally occur in the absence of negligence by someone? Second, if there is negligence, does this sort of accident normally happen because of negligence by someone in the position of the defendant?
If the answer to both questions is "yes" the judge may let the case go forward, and the jury can decide whether or not there is negligence in fact. This exception to the usual rule is a good example of the law's flexibility in pursuit of fairness.
But what lawyers really like about this doctrine is that it has such a cool name: Res Ipsa Loquitur. One moment, we are young and cocky, walking down the street. The next moment, a barrel of flour lands on our head. The Thing Speaks for Itself.
posted by conviser at 1:48 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home