( res ipsa loquitur) Roughly translated means "the facts" (or things) speak for themselves. It is a doctrine of law or a presumption of certain facts.
This Latin phrase means 'the thing speaks for itself. It refers to a legal liability situation. What it means is that in cases where the cause of an accident lies solely within the control of the defendant, the plaintiff does not have to prove negligence - in other words, the facts of the case speak for themselves.
Literally, " a thing that speaks for itself." In tort law, the doctrine which holds a defendant guilty of negligence without an actual showing that he or she was negligent. Its use is limited in theory to cases in which the cause of the plaintiff's injury was entirely under the control of the defendant, and the injury presumably could have been caused only by negligence.
The thing speaks for itself An event that has occurred which, if the subject of litigation, would not require an onus of proof by the plaintiff because of the obvious negligence of the defendant
The thing speaks for itself.” A rebuttable presumption that a person is negligent if the thing causing harm was in his or her control only, and if that type of harm does not usually happen absent negligence. See Murphy v. Montgomery Elevator. Class
a rule of evidence whereby the negligence of an alleged wrongdoer can be inferred from the fact that the accident happened
'The thing speaks for itself.' The presumption that the cause of the injury was under the defendant's exclusive control and the injury itself was of a type that would not normally occur in the absence of negligence (usually involves surgery-related cases where the patient is under anesthesia).
Latin for "the thing speaks for itself." This phrase stands for an evidentiary rule personal injury attorneys in Maryland can use in some circumstances to bring a personal injury action in the absence specific evidence of negligence. Select here for more information.
"The thing speaks for itself" A doctrine applicable in cases where there is prima facie evidence of negligence and that the act or omission complained of is on the face of the facts on the balance of probability as a result of the defendants actions
A Latin phrase, that means "the thing speaks for itself." Refers to situations when it's assumed that a person's injury was caused by the negligent action of another party because the accident was the sort that wouldn't occur unless someone was negligent.
Latin for "the thing speaks for itself". In Torts, it is the doctrine providing that, in some circumstances, the mere fact of an accident's occurrence raises an inference of negligence so as to establish a prima facie case.
"The thing speaks for itself" (latin). A legal phrase meaning that the facts, testimony, and circumstances are so clear that one can conclude, without doubt, that a certain act, or omission of an act, caused a particular damage or injury
(lat.) the thing speaks for itself. In a negligence lawsuit, the plaintiff generally has the burden to prove that the defendant was negligent. The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is a rule of evidence which has the effect of requiring the defendant to prove that he was not negligent in certain circumstances
A rule of evidence that equates to a plaintiff arguing that since the plaintiff could not have caused the injury, and since the thing causing the injury is solely in the hands of the defendant, the defendant should prove that he or she was not liable rather than the plaintiff having to prove that the defendant is liable.
The thing speaks for itself. Rebuttable presumption that the defendant was negligent; the presumption arises upon proof that the instrumentality causing the injury was in the defendant's exclusive control, and that the accident is one which ordinarily does not happen in the absence of negligence.
A Latin term meaning "the thing that speaks for itself." It is used to describe situations in which it is assumed that a person's injury was caused by the negligent action of another party because the accident was the sort that wouldn't occur unless someone was negligent.
(The thing speaks for itself.) When in a legal action the onus of proof, e.g., of negligence, is on one party, he may sometimes discharge this onus by evidence of what has happened, if such a happening raises an inference of negligence.
(thing speaks for itself) defendant has exclusive control of situation causing injury.
A word used in tort to refer to situations where negligence is presumed on the defendant since the object causing injury was in his or her control. This is a presumption which can be rebutted by showing that the event was an inevitable accident and had nothing to do with the defendant's responsibility of control or supervision. An example of res ipsa loquitur would be getting hit by a rock which flies off a passing dump truck. The event itself imputes negligence ( res ipsa loquitur) and can only be defeated if the defendant can show that the event was a total and inevitable accident.
"The thing speaks for itself"; a legal doctrine eliminating the need for the plaintiff to prove NEGLIGENCE.
Literally translated, this expression means "facts speak for themselves." Under this doctrine, an individual is presumed to be negligent if the circumstances of injury are under his complete and exclusive control, and it can be shown that the injury or damage could only have occurred if the individual were negligent.
A Latin term meaning "the thing speaks for itself." Res ipsa loquitur is a legal doctrine or rule of evidence that creates a presumption that a defendant acted negligently simply because a harmful accident occurred. The presumption arises only if (1) the thing that caused the accident was under the defendant's control, (2) the accident could happen only as a result of a careless act and, (3) the plaintiff's behavior did not contribute to the accident. Lawyers often refer to this doctrine as "res ips" or "res ipsa."
Res ipsa loquitur is a legal term from the Latin meaning literally, "The thing itself speaks" but is more often translated "The thing speaks for itself". The doctrine is applied to tort claims which, as a matter of law, do not have to be explained beyond the obvious facts. It is most useful to plaintiffs in certain negligence cases.