Res Ipsa Loquitur
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 9 พ.ย. 2017
- Courts use Res Ipsa Loquitur when evaluating the use of circumstantial evidence to establish breach of duty in a negligence action.
Brought to you by Learn Law Better learnlawbetter.com
Newsletter Sign-Up: eepurl.com/cBOaBv
RESOURCES:
Facebook : / learnlawbetter
Twitter: / learnlawbetter
Blog: learnlawbetter.com/blog
Today I want to discuss the Torts concept res ipsa loquitur, a Latin phrase which translated means “the thing speaks for itself.” The phrase res ipsa loquitur comes from a British case called Byrne v. Boadle, which I will cover in another episode.
Learn Law Better is helping law students get better grades and prepare for the bar exam.
The audience can listen without being bothered by music. Great work here!
Let me know if this episode helped you understand the material better. Thanks!
Learn Law Better am from Africa,Uganda.I find this lecture video very helpful.Thanks a lot!
I believe I mispoke regarding Res Ipsa Loquitor..my apologies for mispelling. Does dumpy ,grumpy trumpy, understand Latin??
Pls apply on a vehicular accident...doctrine of last clear chance vs res ipsa loquitor...pls
Am Victoria from Zambia, Africa. The video was worth it , it has helped me write my tort assignment, 😊 thanks to you.
Glad I could help.
I'm a 1L and this was so helpful. Thank you so much for the way you break down the information and explain it. I sincerely appreciate all of your videos. They have been so helpful to me. EXCELLENT!!!!
Great way of explaining the three elements of Res Ipsa Loquitur. Thanks!
I have a negligence mid-term coming up soon, and this explanation is helpful. Thanks!
i really appreciate the way you breakdown in details,thank you.
Thank you so much for your videos. I have midterms tomorrow and these are a lifesaver!
Great job! You described this well: neither mere definition nor a speech. Perfect length. I suscribed.
Welcome!
rule of Establishment circumstantial evidence when it is connected to the duty- harm suffered most likely caused by the negligence of the defendant, that the harm was due to the defendants negligence of care and that there is no way a Plaintiff did not contribute at all to the harm. very detailed thanks enjoyed!
all of torts is keeping me up at night, I am a first struggling law student. Thank you for your examples.
Glad I can help. Make sure to go to your prof for help. Also, make your own outlines, as that will help you learn the law better.
I was very overwhelmed with definition and examples of them and applications also.
many thanks, I really like the way you’re explaining
I teach a HS class 11-12, and these are great for them. Thank you !
Glad these videos can help.
So easy to digest. Thanks!
Wow, joined the channel not long, but you've been very very helpful, I have torts for the next academic year, but through your explanations I'm almost done with the course outline😂, thank you👍
That's awesome--glad I could help you.
Its great... Thank you...❤️
Very nice video ..am helped
Excellent video!
Thanks! I appreciate the feedback. If there is some topic you would like me to cover, let me know in the discussion tab. And thanks for watching!
Very interesting
thank u !
Great!!!
In the case of the window, he may try to prove it popped as a result of the elements, like wind. I suppose if it can be shown the building should be able to withstand that amount of wind, it would not be a good defense.
Tq sir
Best example of this that helped me understand this was:
You have a surgery and the doctor leaves some cotton swab or something in your body. By definition this can only happen if the doctor was careless and by definition the doctor was in control.
Pls apply on a vehicilular accident ...last clear chance vs res ipsa loquitor..
Yeah it speaks for itself. Just wished we got an example of the document.
Bryne V Boadle, he mentioned it and has another video about this case
Hahaha yeah it speaks for it self
Right! If it was that easy, we wouldn’t spend so much time on it.
My #1 Essay Hack: Not answering the questions in full
2. Not IRAC'ing - make it obvious you have all four items. Sometimes you have facts that lead to a counter argument, or you are missing facts for every element and need additional commentary, however you should have an issue, rule, analysis and conclusion for each issue you address.
3. The conclusion doesn't precisely reflect the issue - Issue, Battery, "Thus, Al committed battery," short and sweet.
4. "Because" or "since" in your conclusion - these words tend to show analysis, and should be relegated to the analysis paragraph.
5. Giant paragraphs. With PR being a potential exception, most analysis can be done in a few sentences. While some analysis will require longer writings, make sure that it's the number of elements / facts that determine your writing length, and not simply a repeating of the same thing, or a run on sentence - kind of like this one.
6. Conclusory writing. If your analysis simply restates the facts, you are demanding that your reader come to their own conclusion. Element because fact wins the day!
I’m a latin student and I also suffer from epilepsy, via vaccine damage & when I was 1st diagnosed, the medical profession covered there backs, does this rule apply ?
Res ipsa loquitur is used for situations that are obvious to anyone. For example, someone skydiving and they are given a backpack instead of a parachute. No need for an expert to determine someone was negligent. I suspect vaccine damage would require a medical expert. But you will want to discuss with a lawyer in the state where the injury occurred.