Res Ipsa Loquitur

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

• Gustave Harrison v. Blueberry Hill
  255 F.2d 730· 3d Cir.· 1958-05-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial judge erred in dismissing the plaintiff's negligence action against Blueberry Hill and in dismissing Blueberry Hill's cross-claim against Tryon Construction Corp., as both dismissals were premised on an erroneous prior dismissal.
• Johnston v. Rodis
  251 F.2d 917· D.C. Cir.· 1958-01-23 ·cited 4×
  A physician's statement that a treatment is "perfectly safe," if made without qualification, may constitute a warranty, precluding summary judgment.
• Goldman v. Hollywood Beach Hotel Co.
  244 F.2d 413· 5th Cir.· 1957-05-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the hotel company was not negligent because there was no evidence that it knew or should have known of the substance on which the plaintiff slipped, nor that the substance had been present long enough to charge the hotel with notice.
• Coleman v. Sears
  238 F.2d 206· 8th Cir.· 1956-11-02 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to establish a res ipsa loquitur case because the evidence did not exclude the possibility that a third party, over whom the defendant had no control, caused the bottle to fall.
• Irwin v. United States
  236 F.2d 774· 2d Cir.· 1956-09-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is inapplicable to the facts of this case, and the trial court's findings of fact will not be disturbed.
• United States v. Coffey
  233 F.2d 41· 9th Cir.· 1956-03-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court erred in finding the government liable under the Tort Claims Act, as there was insufficient evidence of government negligence and proximate causation, and the plaintiff's own actions were the sole cause of his injuries.
• The Union Pac. R.R. Co. v. Ward
  230 F.2d 287· 10th Cir.· 1956-02-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the jury's finding of negligence was supported by the evidence and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in its jury instructions or evidentiary rulings.
• Gen. Elec. Co. v. Rees
  217 F.2d 595· 9th Cir.· 1954-11-24 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the employer owed no duty to the general public regarding the health of its bus driver, and the trial court erred in submitting the case to the jury on a theory of negligent examination without sufficient proof.
• Ayres Marine Serv., Inc. v. W. Horace Williams Co.
  213 F.2d 27· 5th Cir.· 1954-06-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in finding the towing vessel negligent for improperly coupling barges, which caused damage to an anchor winch, and that the libelant met its burden of proof.
• Gulf Ref. Co. v. Delavan
  203 F.2d 769· 5th Cir.· 1953-04-13 ·cited 4×
• Cole v. Cap. Transit Co.
  195 F.2d 568· D.C. Cir.· 1952-03-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court erred in directing a verdict for the defendant, as the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur created a jury question regarding the streetcar's negligent operation.
• J. R. Watkins Co. v. Raymond
  184 F.2d 925· 8th Cir.· 1950-11-13 ·cited 4×
  The court held that there was no substantial evidence that the defendant's shampoo contained poisonous or deleterious materials, and therefore the trial court erred in denying the defendant's motion for a directed verdict.
• Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co. v. Jones
  177 F.2d 166· 4th Cir.· 1949-10-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial judge's findings of fact were not clearly erroneous and the amendment to the complaint was properly allowed.
• Miller v. Elgin
  177 F.2d 224· 7th Cir.· 1949-10-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence of negligence to go to the jury, and that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur and the doctrine of imminent peril were properly applied.
• THE Evelyn v. Tuckahoe
  170 F.2d 899· 4th Cir.· 1948-12-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court's findings of fact and conclusions of law were correct, and thus the decree in favor of the libellant should be affirmed.
• Brown v. Dorney Park Coaster Co., Inc.
  167 F.2d 433· 3d Cir.· 1948-03-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the facts as found by the jury did not warrant a conclusion, as a matter of law, that the defendant met the test of reasonable inspection under the circumstances.
• Johnson v. City OF Jacksonville
  157 Fla. 14· Fla.· 1946-02-05 ·cited 4×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a directed verdict for the City of Jacksonville in a personal injury case. The court found that the plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence to establish the city's knowledge of the dangerous street defect, and the doctrine of res ipsa lo
• Detroit Edison Co. v. Knowles
  152 F.2d 422· 6th Cir.· 1945-12-13 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court erred in its jury instructions regarding res ipsa loquitur, which is not recognized in Michigan law.
• Hotel Dempsey Co. v. Teel (two cases)
  128 F.2d 673· 5th Cir.· 1942-06-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur was applicable, allowing the jury to infer negligence from the falling window shade.
• United States v. De Back
  118 F.2d 208· 9th Cir.· 1941-03-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that it had jurisdiction to hear the claim despite the amount exceeding the Tucker Act limit, and that the evidence supported a finding of negligence.
• Standard Oil Co. of N.J. v. Midgett
  116 F.2d 562· 4th Cir.· 1941-01-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial judge correctly refused to direct a verdict for the defendant, as there was substantial evidence to support the jury's finding of negligence.
• Wood v. Worch
  68 Fla. 244· Fla.· 1914-11-10 ·cited 4×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a jury verdict for a homeowner whose house burned down after county employees, under the direction of a county commissioner, burned brush near the property. The court found the evidence insufficient to prove the commissioner acted with reckless
• MacCLATCHEY v. HCA Health Servs. OF Fla., Inc.
  139 So. 3d 970· Fla. 4th DCA· 2014-06-11 ·cited 3×
  Marie MacClatchey appeals summary judgment in her negligence action against a hospital after a framed picture fell from a patient room wall and struck her head. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed, finding genuine issues of material fact regarding whether res ipsa loquit
• In re Standard Jury Instructions IN Civil Case-Report NO. 12-01
  130 So. 3d 596· Fla.· 2013-05-30 ·cited 3×
  The Florida Supreme Court authorized amendments to standard jury instructions in civil cases, making non-substantive technical revisions for clarity and modernization, including corrections to spelling, grammar, cross-references, and gender-neutral language, as well as clarificat
• Soltwisch v. Pasco Cnty.
  33 So. 3d 85· Fla. 2d DCA· 2010-04-09 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the trial court erred in granting a directed verdict for Pasco County on the negligence and res ipsa loquitur claims, as there was sufficient evidence for a jury to find liability.
• Empire Club, Inc. v. Hernandez
  974 So. 2d 447· Fla. 2d DCA· 2007-12-28 ·cited 3×
  A customer injured by a fallen speaker at a nightclub obtained a jury verdict in her negligence suit, but the appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial because the trial court erroneously excluded evidence of the defendant's care and experience. The court clarified th
• Schindler Elevator Corp. v. Carvalho
  895 So. 2d 1103· Fla. 4th DCA· 2005-01-19 ·cited 3×
  A shopper injured on a malfunctioning escalator sued the maintenance contractor, Schindler Elevator. The Florida appellate court reversed the jury verdict, holding that the plaintiff's expert failed to establish the legal cause of the accident by providing only conclusory opinion
• Neace v. Laimans
  951 F.2d 139· 7th Cir.· 1991-12-18 ·cited 3×
  The court affirmed the district court's finding of liability under res ipsa loquitur and its award of damages, finding the exclusion of expert testimony harmless and the damages award not manifestly inadequate.
• Moore v. Seaboard Coast Line R.R. Co.
  291 So. 2d 656· Fla. 1st DCA· 1974-03-12 ·cited 3×
  An employee of Seaboard Coast Line Railroad sued for injuries sustained when a railroad freight car door fell on him during debris clearing operations. The trial court erred by excluding from jury instructions the defendant's duty to provide adequate equipment and appliances, req
• Nelson v. Ford Motor Co.
  469 F.2d 261· 5th Cir.· 1972-11-14 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury on contributory negligence and in instructing the jury on res ipsa loquitur.
• Caldwell v. Am. Cyanamid Co.
  32 Fla. Supp. 163· Hillsborough Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1969-01-02 ·cited 3×
  This case considers whether Florida law recognizes the doctrine of strict liability for damages caused by the escape of impounded water, a principle known as Rylands v. Fletcher. The court found that while Florida appellate courts have not directly addressed this, the weight of A
• Belle M. Kline v. Publix Super Mkts., Inc.
  178 So. 2d 739· Fla. 2d DCA· 1965-08-26 ·cited 3×
  The court held that an awkwardly stated jury instruction, if legally correct, is not reversible error if the meaning is reasonably clear and the party was not prejudiced.
• Elois Brookshire v. Fla. Bendix Co., Inc.
  163 So. 2d 881· Fla.· 1964-04-24 ·cited 3×
• Hawkeye-Security Ins. Co. v. Indem. Ins. Co. OF N. Am.
  260 F.2d 361· 10th Cir.· 1958-10-24 ·cited 3×
  An insurer is not liable for bad faith solely for refusing to follow its attorney's advice to appeal an adverse judgment against its insured.
• Sickles v. Graybar Elec. Co.
  219 F.2d 847· 7th Cir.· 1955-02-18 ·cited 3×
  The court held that there was insufficient evidence to support a finding that the defendant's employees moved the scaffold support, thus precluding a finding of negligence.
• Ague v. Am. Agric. Chem. Co.
  5 Fla. Supp. 133· Hillsborough Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1953-03-17 ·cited 3×
  The court held that Florida law does not impose absolute liability for the escape of mining waste, requiring proof of negligence.
• Nodurft v. Servico Ctr. Assocs., Ltd.
  884 So. 2d 395· Fla. 4th DCA· 2004-09-22 ·cited 2×
  The trial court erred in failing to grant the appellant's request for a jury instruction on the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur.
• Ribovich v. Anheuser Busch, Inc.
  106 F. Supp. 373· M.D. Fla.· 1997-07-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiff presented sufficient evidence to raise genuine issues of material fact regarding the location of his injury and the applicability of the res ipsa loquitur doctrine, thus precluding summary judgment.
• Barcelo v. The Est. OF Silvia E. Nelson
  694 So. 2d 91· Fla. 3d DCA· 1997-04-30 ·cited 2×
  Circumstantial evidence showing weather conditions, road conditions, traffic control devices, traffic conditions, time of day, and the location of impact on the plaintiff's vehicle is sufficient to survive a directed verdict motion in a negligence case, even when the plaintiff di
• Morris v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc.
  673 So. 2d 520· Fla. 5th DCA· 1996-04-19 ·cited 2×
• Hessel v. O'Hearn
  977 F.2d 299· 7th Cir.· 1992-10-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that police officers did not exceed the scope of a search warrant when seizing items that were later returned, but that the de minimis doctrine does not bar a claim for the theft of a can of soda pop by one officer.
• Phillips Buick-Pontiac-Gmc, Inc. v. Dallon
  602 So. 2d 594· Fla. 5th DCA· 1992-06-19 ·cited 2×
  The trial court erred in granting a new trial because the evidence did not warrant a res ipsa loquitur jury instruction.
• Peyton v. ST. Louis Sw. Ry. Co.
  962 F.2d 832· 8th Cir.· 1992-04-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the employer was not liable under FELA for providing a defective tool because there was no evidence the employer could have discovered the defect with reasonable care.
• Goodwin v. Enserch Corp.
  949 F.2d 1098· 10th Cir.· 1991-11-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiff presented sufficient evidence to support a jury finding of negligence, and therefore, the trial court erred in granting judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
• DiPALMA v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp.
  938 F.2d 1463· 1st Cir.· 1991-07-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that no reasonable juror could find for the plaintiffs on any of their claims, affirming the directed verdict.
• Williams v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
  922 F.2d 1357· 8th Cir.· 1990-12-31 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellant failed to preserve essential evidence by not making an offer of proof, thus preventing a finding of plain error.
• Garrett v. Hamilton Standard Controls, Inc.
  850 F.2d 253· 5th Cir.· 1988-07-28 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the jury's rejection of the plaintiffs' strict liability claim rendered harmless any error in the district court's failure to submit their proffered negligent manufacturing issue and related res ipsa loquitur instruction.
• Vanderwater v. Hatch
  835 F.2d 239· 10th Cir.· 1987-12-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing a res ipsa loquitur instruction, denying the equal protection challenge, or denying the motion for a new trial.
• Mulay Plastics, Inc. v. Grand Trunk W. R.R. Co.
  822 F.2d 676· 7th Cir.· 1987-06-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the jury's verdicts were not inconsistent and that there was substantial evidence to support the jury's finding that no defendant was negligent or proximately caused the damage. The award of attorney's fees was also affirmed.
• Consol. Grain & Barge Co. v. Huffman Towing Co.
  801 F.2d 1072· 8th Cir.· 1986-09-26 ·cited 2×
  The district court erred in failing to apply the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur to infer negligence.