Slack v. Premier-Pabst Corp.
Superior Court of Delaware
1Opinion of the Court
Layton, C. J.,
delivering the opinion of the Court:
In support of the count of the declaration demurred to, the plaintiff invokes the doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitur. Interpretations of the doctrine will be found in comparatively recent decisions of this Court in Edmanson v. Wilmington & P. Traction Co., 2 W. W. Harr. (32 Del.) 177, 120 A. 923; Starr v. Starr, 5 W. W. Harr. (35 Del.) 556, 170 A. 924, and Thompson v. Cooles, 7 W. W. Harr. (37 Del.) 83, 180 A. 522.
The rule, being one of evidence, of a limited and restricted scope, and not arbitrary or inexorable in its nature, is to be applied with…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- Chenall v. Palmer Brick Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1903
- Payne v. Rome Coca-Cola Bottling Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1912
- Dail v. TaylorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1909
- Stolle v. Anheuser-Busch Inc.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1925
- Cashwell v. Fayetteville Pepsi-Cola Bottling WorksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1917
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Escola v. Coca Cola Bottling Co.California Supreme Court · 1944
- Evangelio v. Metropolitan Bottling Co. Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1959
- Honea v. City Dairy, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1943
- Bradley v. Conway Springs Bottling Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1941
- Ciociola v. Delaware Coca-Cola Bottling CompanySupreme Court of Delaware · 1961
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.