Tinder v. Nordstrom, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the CourtBaker, C.J.
The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is applied in exceptional cases, when supported by the facts of the case and the demands of justice. Res ipsa loquitur is a method of proof, not a separate and additional form of negligence. A plaintiff that successfully establishes the elements of res ipsa loquitur is entitled to an inference of negligence. Because such a plaintiff is, in effect, spared the necessity of establishing a complete prima facie case of negligence against the defendant, the doctrine is to be used sparingly.
Cheryl Tinder has failed to allege or prove facts warranting application of…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Young v. Key Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1989
- Kaiser v. Suburban Transportation SystemWashington Supreme Court · 1965
- Zukowsky v. BrownWashington Supreme Court · 1971
- Morner v. Union Pacific RailroadWashington Supreme Court · 1948
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Marshall v. Bally's Pacwest, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 1999
- The-Anh Nguyen v. City of SeattleCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2014
- Tortes v. King CountyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2003
- Curtis v. LeinWashington Supreme Court · 2010
- Curtis v. LeinWashington Supreme Court · 2010
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.