Res Ipsa Loquitur

800 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Butcher v. Miami Elevator Co., Inc.
  568 So. 2d 61· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-05-15 ·cited 4×
  An eleven-year-old boy was injured when an elevator door failed, trapping his leg. The trial court excluded a res ipsa loquitur instruction and admitted hearsay statements blaming the child's actions for the accident. The appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial, fin
• Pinecrest Stables, Inc. v. Hill
  487 So. 2d 82· Fla. 5th DCA· 1986-04-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court erred in giving a jury instruction on res ipsa loquitur because the injury could have occurred from non-negligent causes and was not under the exclusive control of the defendant at the time of injury.
• Higgins v. The White SOX Baseball Club, Inc.
  787 F.2d 1125· 7th Cir.· 1986-04-02 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the jury instruction regarding a possessor of land's liability for defects was inaccurate and that the district court erred in denying a new trial.
• Owens v. Bourns, Inc.
  766 F.2d 145· 4th Cir.· 1985-06-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that plaintiffs' evidence of causation was legally insufficient to permit a jury to decide the issue of liability, as expert testimony lacked reasonable medical certainty and was inconsistent with other evidence.
• United States v. Baycon Indus., Inc.
  744 F.2d 1505· 11th Cir.· 1984-10-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the information must allege a volitional or causal act by the appellees that created the obstruction to state a claim for criminal liability under the Rivers and Harbors Act.
• Marrero v. Malcolm G. Goldsmith, M.D.
  448 So. 2d 543· Fla. 3d DCA· 1984-03-20 ·cited 4×
  In this medical malpractice appeal, Mrs. Marrero sued three physicians for injuries to her left arm (brachial plexopathy) sustained during simultaneous surgical procedures. The trial court entered judgment for the defendants, and Marrero appealed, challenging the denial of a res
• Bardy v. Sears
  443 So. 2d 212· Fla. 2d DCA· 1983-12-14 ·cited 4×
  The Bardys appealed a judgment in favor of Sears after a jury trial, seeking a res ipsa loquitur instruction for an injury caused by a car battery explosion. The court affirmed the trial court's refusal to give the instruction, holding that the Bardys failed to meet the threshold
• Dundee Cement Co. v. Chem. Labs., Inc.
  712 F.2d 1166· 7th Cir.· 1983-07-18 ·cited 4×
  Illinois law does not permit recovery for purely economic losses in a negligence action where the plaintiff suffered no physical damage and had no special relationship with the defendant or the injured property.
• Biggs v. Logicon, Inc.
  663 F.2d 52· 8th Cir.· 1981-11-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence of the defendant's negligence to overcome the defendant's motion for involuntary dismissal.
• McWHORTER v. City of New Smyrna Beach Utils. Comm'n
  400 So. 2d 23· Fla. 5th DCA· 1981-05-06 ·cited 4×
  The McWhorter family's home was flooded with sewage due to a blockage in the city's sewer system. Despite clear evidence that the city was responsible for the blockage and resulting damages, the jury returned a verdict for the city. The appellate court reversed, holding that res
• Ofelia Guzman and Thomas Guzman v. Faraldo
  373 So. 2d 66· Fla. 3d DCA· 1979-07-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to present sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case of medical malpractice, specifically lacking proof of proximate causation.
• Beach v. Halifax Hosp. Dist.
  360 So. 2d 114· Fla. 1st DCA· 1978-06-08 ·cited 4×
• Canada DRY Bottling Co. OF Fla., Inc. v. K. M. A., Inc.
  349 So. 2d 846· Fla. 2d DCA· 1977-09-16 ·cited 4×
  Canada Dry Bottling Company sought review of a circuit court's decision that reversed the county court's judgment against it but allowed K.M.A. to reopen its case to present additional evidence of negligence. The Florida District Court of Appeal held that once a defendant's motio
• Faulkenberry v. La. & Ark. Ry. Co.
  551 F.2d 650· 5th Cir.· 1977-04-29 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment for the plaintiff-railroad engineer, finding no errors in the jury's verdict or the judgment.
• Nat'l Sur. Corp. v. Charles Carter & Co., Inc.
  539 F.2d 450· 5th Cir.· 1976-09-24 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the general contractor's claim for expenses incurred due to the subcontractor's negligence was an action arising from contract, not tort, and thus not time-barred. The court also clarified that the liability insurer's policy required payment on behalf of the i
• Harris v. The Atchison
  538 F.2d 682· 5th Cir.· 1976-09-13 ·cited 4×
  Phillips' negligence in conducting the butadiene transfer operation was the proximate cause of the firemen's injuries, and Santa Fe was entitled to indemnity from Phillips.
• Fed. Ins. Co. v. United States
  538 F.2d 300· 10th Cir.· 1976-07-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court properly applied the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur to infer the Government's negligence as the cause of the fire, as the instrumentality was sufficiently identified and within the Government's exclusive control after eliminating potential defec
• Meryl Sergermeister v. Rec. Corp. OF Am., Inc.
  314 So. 2d 626· Fla. 4th DCA· 1975-06-13 ·cited 4×
  A minor plaintiff was injured when her finger was pinched by a safety restraining gate on an amusement park ride called the 'Lover's Coach.' The trial court gave standard jury instructions on reasonable care and refused plaintiff's requested instructions imposing a higher duty of
• Kelly v. Am. Airlines, Inc.
  508 F.2d 1379· 5th Cir.· 1975-03-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur should not be extended to air turbulence cases and was inappropriate given the facts presented.
• Kukuruza v. Gen. Elec. Co.
  510 F.2d 1208· 1st Cir.· 1975-02-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the expert testimony was admissible, the jury could find a hidden defect, and the jury instructions, while imperfect, were not prejudicial.
• Ianuzzi v. S. African Marine Corp., Ltd.
  510 F.2d 950· 2d Cir.· 1975-02-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a shipowner cannot be held liable for negligence based on a defective winch unless the owner had notice of the specific defect that caused the accident.
• Ellis B. Hall v. The Atchison
  504 F.2d 380· 5th Cir.· 1974-11-18 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court erred in granting a directed verdict, as there was sufficient evidence of negligence, causation, and foreseeability to present the case to a jury.
• Traupman v. Am. Dredging Co.
  470 F.2d 736· 2d Cir.· 1972-12-05 ·cited 4×
• The Citizens State Bank v. Penn Cent. Transp. Co.
  463 F.2d 611· 7th Cir.· 1972-06-19 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial judge's remarks regarding the immateriality of the weight variance were not prejudicial and did not warrant a mistrial, and that the jury instructions were appropriate.
• Evans v. Green
  251 So. 2d 318· Fla. 1st DCA· 1971-08-12 ·cited 4×
  In this negligence case arising from an accidental shooting, the Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed a jury verdict for the defendant, holding that affirmative defenses of contributory negligence and assumption of risk were properly submitted to the jury and that res ipsa l
• Mapp v. Cedars OF Lebanon Hosp., Inc.
  249 So. 2d 521· Fla. 3d DCA· 1971-06-22 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court erred in directing a verdict for the defendant because the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur should have been applied.
• Geraldine S. Furnari and Richard v. Furnari
  242 So. 2d 742· Fla. 4th DCA· 1971-01-08 ·cited 4×
  In this dental malpractice case, the trial court erroneously directed a verdict for the defendant dentist after he left an infected root tip in the patient's jaw during a difficult tooth extraction. The appellate court reversed, holding that a jury could reasonably conclude negli
• Odessky v. SIX L'S Packing Co., Inc.
  213 So. 2d 732· Fla. 1st DCA· 1968-09-05 ·cited 4×
  Morris Odessky sought certiorari review of a Department of Agriculture Commissioner's order requiring him to pay $5,910 to Six L's Packing Company for allegedly defective tomatoes. The court upheld the Commissioner's decision that the tomatoes met specifications at delivery and r
• Ill. Cent. R.R. Co. v. Riley
  392 F.2d 787· 6th Cir.· 1968-04-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the jury instructions were not erroneous and no trial errors occurred that adversely affected the plaintiffs' substantial rights, thus affirming the judgment.
• Am. Commercial Lines, Inc. v. Silver Creek Coal Co.
  393 F.2d 178· 7th Cir.· 1968-03-25 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court's findings of fact were not clearly erroneous, affirming the judgment for the appellee.
• Cathleen Geehan v. Monahan
  382 F.2d 111· 7th Cir.· 1967-07-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Wisconsin federal court had jurisdiction due to an agreed transfer order, and that Wisconsin substantive law applied. It also affirmed the trial court's jury instructions regarding res ipsa loquitur and voir dire questions.
• Reed v. Rheem Mfg. Co. & Emp'rs Mut. Liab. Ins. Co. of Wis.
  364 F.2d 810· 5th Cir.· 1966-07-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the release of one alleged joint tortfeasor does not discharge others if there is no proof of joint liability, and the burden is on the movant for summary judgment to establish such liability.
• Hayward v. Echols
  362 F.2d 791· 5th Cir.· 1966-06-22 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to prove negligence on the part of the physicians or hospital, and the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur was not applicable.
• S. Ariz. York Refrigeration Co. v. The Bush Mfg. Co.
  361 F.2d 336· 9th Cir.· 1966-04-22 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the evidence produced by the defendant at the second trial was insufficient to meet the burden of rebutting the inference of negligence established by the res ipsa loquitur doctrine, and that the district court's findings lacked evidentiary support.
• Appalachian Ins. Co. v. Knutson
  358 F.2d 679· 8th Cir.· 1966-04-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur was inapplicable to the facts presented under Kansas law.
• Stiles v. Gove
  345 F.2d 991· 9th Cir.· 1965-05-24 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in giving a res ipsa loquitur instruction, nor in its instructions on the duty of care for common carriers, nor in allowing an amendment to conform to the evidence, nor in refusing requested instructions.
• S. Broward Hosp. Dist. v. Schmitt
  172 So. 2d 12· Fla. 2d DCA· 1965-01-20 ·cited 4×
  The hospital appeals a jury verdict for plaintiff in a negligence case where plaintiff fell from an examining table while alone in the emergency room after a heart attack. The court reversed the judgment, finding that plaintiff failed to establish negligence with competent eviden
• Fowler v. Tenn. Valley Auth.
  321 F.2d 566· 6th Cir.· 1963-06-12 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Tennessee Valley Authority was not liable for the deaths of two men electrocuted by power lines, as the contract and facts showed no assumption of duty to inspect or maintain the distributor's lines, nor notice of a defect.
• Ervin T. Kraklau v. Colby Bayman
  318 F.2d 400· 7th Cir.· 1963-06-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict and that the trial court did not err in refusing to give the jury plaintiff's tendered instruction on res ipsa loquitur.
• Emp'rs' Liab. Assurance Corp., Ltd. v. Edmond J. Thomassie
  293 F.2d 110· 5th Cir.· 1961-08-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court's application of res ipsa loquitur was justified and supported by the evidence and Louisiana law.
• Hearst Corp. v. Cuneo Press, Inc.
  291 F.2d 714· 7th Cir.· 1961-06-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the character of the bailment and whether an accord and satisfaction was reached were questions of fact for the jury, not questions of law for the court.
• Mrs. Fannie Lazarus v. E. AIR Lines, Inc.
  292 F.2d 748· D.C. Cir.· 1961-05-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a directed verdict for the defendant was reversible error, as the plaintiff presented sufficient evidence to infer negligence or establish a duty to warn.
• Kadushin v. Philmac Realty Corp.
  128 So. 2d 400· Fla. 3d DCA· 1961-03-30 ·cited 4×
  A paying hotel guest sued for injuries caused by a falling ceiling. The trial court granted summary judgment for the hotel based on affidavits showing no observable defects, but the appellate court reversed, holding that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur applied and the question
• Gillen v. United States
  281 F.2d 425· 9th Cir.· 1960-07-12 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court's findings of fact and conclusions of law were supported by substantial evidence and not clearly erroneous, affirming the judgment for the United States.
• Forsman v. Pa. R.R. Co.
  280 F.2d 315· 3d Cir.· 1960-06-22 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the jury was properly instructed on res ipsa loquitur and specific negligence, and that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's finding of negligence against the railroad.
• Gerard v. Am. Airlines, Inc.
  272 F.2d 35· 2d Cir.· 1959-11-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the facts were sufficient to justify an inference of negligence under the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur.
• Royal Mail Lines, Ltd. v. Peck
  269 F.2d 857· 9th Cir.· 1959-06-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court erred in finding the ship unseaworthy based on the jury's general negligence verdict and that indemnity issues between the shipowner and stevedore required further factual findings.
• Lustine-Nicholson Motor Co., Inc. v. Petzal
  268 F.2d 893· D.C. Cir.· 1959-06-25 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the jury instruction on res ipsa loquitur was proper and that the plaintiff did not lose his status as a business invitee. The court also found no prejudice from the denial of an assumption of risk instruction.
• S. Fla. Hosp. Corp. v. McCREA
  112 So. 2d 393· Fla. 3d DCA· 1959-05-28 ·cited 4×
  This case involves a hospital appealing judgments awarded to patients based on jury verdicts. The hospital argued that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur should not have been applied because the patients presented evidence of specific negligence. The appellate court affirmed the l
• Gallis v. Peelle Co.
  264 F.2d 663· 2d Cir.· 1959-03-12 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial judge erred in excluding a prior inconsistent statement made by a plaintiff, which was crucial for impeachment and as an admission.