Res Ipsa Loquitur

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 9 лис 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.

КОМЕНТАРІ • 46

  • @Learnlawbetter
    @Learnlawbetter  6 років тому +34

    Let me know if this episode helped you understand the material better. Thanks!

    • @princeolimiwinyi6037
      @princeolimiwinyi6037 5 років тому

      Learn Law Better am from Africa,Uganda.I find this lecture video very helpful.Thanks a lot!

    • @catherinehickman7418
      @catherinehickman7418 4 роки тому

      I believe I mispoke regarding Res Ipsa Loquitor..my apologies for mispelling. Does dumpy ,grumpy trumpy, understand Latin??

    • @ianeunellmalinao9
      @ianeunellmalinao9 4 роки тому

      Pls apply on a vehicular accident...doctrine of last clear chance vs res ipsa loquitor...pls

    • @victoriamweemba3982
      @victoriamweemba3982 3 роки тому +1

      Am Victoria from Zambia, Africa. The video was worth it , it has helped me write my tort assignment, 😊 thanks to you.

    • @Learnlawbetter
      @Learnlawbetter  3 роки тому

      Glad I could help.

  • @cascam1
    @cascam1 Рік тому +1

    The audience can listen without being bothered by music. Great work here!

  • @ltony6907
    @ltony6907 5 років тому +5

    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!!!!

  • @cranwela02
    @cranwela02 6 років тому +5

    Great way of explaining the three elements of Res Ipsa Loquitur. Thanks!

  • @scarletmoon9256
    @scarletmoon9256 3 роки тому +3

    I have a negligence mid-term coming up soon, and this explanation is helpful. Thanks!

  • @juliehansen5037
    @juliehansen5037 5 років тому +2

    Thank you so much for your videos. I have midterms tomorrow and these are a lifesaver!

  • @sorayacervantez1126
    @sorayacervantez1126 4 роки тому +2

    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!

  • @ahmedgonisheriff4367
    @ahmedgonisheriff4367 5 років тому +2

    i really appreciate the way you breakdown in details,thank you.

  • @claypage1089
    @claypage1089 3 роки тому +1

    Great job! You described this well: neither mere definition nor a speech. Perfect length. I suscribed.

  • @indaystocome7416
    @indaystocome7416 6 років тому +3

    all of torts is keeping me up at night, I am a first struggling law student. Thank you for your examples.

    • @Learnlawbetter
      @Learnlawbetter  6 років тому +2

      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.

    • @catherinehickman7418
      @catherinehickman7418 4 роки тому

      I was very overwhelmed with definition and examples of them and applications also.

  • @ricey28
    @ricey28 Рік тому +1

    I teach a HS class 11-12, and these are great for them. Thank you !

  • @bluepretzel6801
    @bluepretzel6801 3 роки тому +1

    many thanks, I really like the way you’re explaining

  • @blackfalcon1324
    @blackfalcon1324 Рік тому

    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.

  • @emmanuelarthur2906
    @emmanuelarthur2906 3 роки тому +2

    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👍

  • @caitlynh7345
    @caitlynh7345 4 роки тому +1

    So easy to digest. Thanks!

  • @daypayannath1133
    @daypayannath1133 6 років тому +2

    Its great... Thank you...❤️

  • @annereilley4892
    @annereilley4892 5 років тому +3

    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.

  • @francismashowo2018
    @francismashowo2018 Рік тому +1

    Very interesting

  • @sangwerajaiccan7681
    @sangwerajaiccan7681 6 років тому +1

    Very nice video ..am helped

  • @electricarrows
    @electricarrows 6 років тому +2

    Excellent video!

    • @Learnlawbetter
      @Learnlawbetter  6 років тому +1

      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!

  • @SEVEN-bh7qq
    @SEVEN-bh7qq 5 років тому +1

    Great!!!

  • @eniola4201
    @eniola4201 5 років тому +1

    thank u !

  • @yangmanis9251
    @yangmanis9251 2 роки тому +1

    Tq sir

  • @ianeunellmalinao9
    @ianeunellmalinao9 4 роки тому

    Pls apply on a vehicilular accident ...last clear chance vs res ipsa loquitor..

  • @sheldonblackwood4483
    @sheldonblackwood4483 3 роки тому

    Yeah it speaks for itself. Just wished we got an example of the document.

    • @bluepretzel6801
      @bluepretzel6801 3 роки тому

      Bryne V Boadle, he mentioned it and has another video about this case

  • @cascam1
    @cascam1 Рік тому

    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!

  • @ladyfaith.5932
    @ladyfaith.5932 2 роки тому +1

    Hahaha yeah it speaks for it self

    • @Learnlawbetter
      @Learnlawbetter  2 роки тому

      Right! If it was that easy, we wouldn’t spend so much time on it.

  • @kerryhill9749
    @kerryhill9749 2 роки тому

    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 ?

    • @Learnlawbetter
      @Learnlawbetter  2 роки тому +1

      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.