Legal Opinion

Curtis v. Lein

Washington Supreme Court

Decided September 16, 2010No. 83307-9PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStephens, J.

¶1 — This case requires us to revisit our body of law involving res ipsa loquitur. Petitioner, Tambra Curtis, lived on a farm owned by the respondents, Jack and Claire Lein. Curtis was injured on the farm when a dock on which she was walking gave way beneath her. The Leins *888had the dock destroyed shortly after the incident, so there is no evidence as to the dock’s condition at the time of the accident. Curtis brought a negligence suit against the Leins, who moved for summary judgment. Curtis invoked res ipsa loquitur to fill in the evidentiary gaps caused by the dock’s destruction. The lower…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Tincani v. Inland Empire Zoological SocietyWashington Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Douglas v. BussabargerWashington Supreme Court · 1968
  3. Zukowsky v. BrownWashington Supreme Court · 1971
  4. Morner v. Union Pacific RailroadWashington Supreme Court · 1948
  5. Horner v. Northern Pacific Beneficial Ass'n Hospitals, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1963

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. McKown v. Simon Property Group, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2015
  2. The-Anh Nguyen v. City of SeattleCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2014
  3. Tavai v. Walmart Stores, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2013
  4. Margie Lockner v. Pierce CountyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2017
  5. Jodi Brugh v. Fun-tastic Rides Co.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2019

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API