1956•bepress Legal RepositoryOpen access

Danner v. Atkins [DISSENT]

Jesse W. Carter

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

In a case involving a truck's unexplained collision with a building, doctrine of res ipsa loquitur did not apply as to truck driver where the truck was under the control of a mechanic rather than of the driver just before the accident.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

In a case involving a truck's unexplained collision with a building, doctrine of res ipsa loquitur did not apply as to truck driver where the truck was under the control of a mechanic rather than of the driver just before the accident.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

In a case involving a truck's unexplained collision with a building, doctrine of res ipsa loquitur did not apply as to truck driver where the truck was under the control of a mechanic rather than of the driver just before the accident.

Key concepts: Dissent, Economics, Political science, Law, Politics

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Danner v. Atkins [DISSENT] — Research Paper | ScholarLens