Legal Opinion · Dissent

Barker v. Clark

Court of Appeals of Arkansas

Decided March 22, 2000No. CA 99-702Published

1DissentJohn Mauzy Pittman, Judge

I dissent because I do not agree that appellant was entitled to an instruction on res ipsa loquitur. Under the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, it is vital to show that the instrumentality causing the injury was under the exclusive control of the defendant. Ford Motor Co. v. Gornatti, 253 Ark. 237, 486 S.W.2d 10 (1972). Therefore, the doctrine will not apply if the accident might have been in part due to the act of a third person over whom the defendant had no control. 57B Am. JUR. 2d, Negligence § 1876 (1989). Other responsible causes, including the conduct of third persons, must be…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. William Biggs v. Logicon, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1981
  2. Eisner v. FieldsCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1999
  3. Ford Motor Co. v. GornattiSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1972

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

Powered by the Exa API