Res Ipsa Loquitur in Hospital and Malpractice Cases
Julien C. Renswick
Abstract
Open-access reader
Julien C. Renswick
Abstract
Open-access reader
Most legal texts state as a matter of law that in order to apply the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur it is required that plaintiff show that the instrumentality causing his injury was in the continuous and exclusive control of one defendant. This general proposition has been stated in Ohio on several occasions. However, in the last few years some exceptions to this general rule have been established in several jurisdictions.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Most legal texts state as a matter of law that in order to apply the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur it is required that plaintiff show that the instrumentality causing his injury was in the continuous and exclusive control of one defendant. This general proposition has been stated in Ohio on several occasions. However, in the last few years some exceptions to this general rule have been established in several jurisdictions.
Key concepts: Res ipsa loquitur, Malpractice, Law, Medical malpractice, Medical negligence, Medicine, Philosophy, Political science