A patient undergoes a routine surgical procedure and later discovers that a surgical instrument was mistakenly left inside their body. The patient decides to sue the hospital for negligence, relying on the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. Which of the following elements must the patient demonstrate for res ipsa loquitur to apply?
The plaintiff must have directly witnessed the negligent act by the defendant.
The injury must have been caused by a third party over whom the defendant has no control.
The event must be of a kind that does not usually occur without negligence, and the defendant had exclusive control over the instrumentality causing the injury.
The plaintiff must show that the defendant intended to cause harm.
The correct answer identifies that for res ipsa loquitur to apply, the injury must be of a kind that does not usually occur without negligence, and the defendant had control over the instrumentality causing the injury. Other options incorrectly state the need for direct observation, third-party causation, or intent, which are not required for res ipsa loquitur.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What is res ipsa loquitur?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
Why is exclusive control important in res ipsa loquitur cases?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What other elements are typically needed to prove negligence besides res ipsa loquitur?