P was killed while a guest in a tractor trailer. The truck swerved off the road when another truck passed it on a curve.
D testified that there was some loose gravel on the road and that he just lost control.
P's family sued D in negligence.
Procedural History:
Lower Court found for P.
TN COA reversed, found for D.
Issues:
When res ipsa loquitur applies, must the jury be instructed that negligence was present?
Holding/Rule:
When res ipsa loquitur applies, it merely creates the inference of negligence which the jury may draw from or not.
Reasoning:
In cases where a car runs off of the road, res ipsa usually applies and does here.
A jury can reasonably refuse to find negligence on the part of the D even in the face of res ipsa.
Res ipsa has had three differing effects in different cases…
It warrants an inference of negligence which the jury may draw or not
It raises a presumption of negligence which requires the jury to find negligence if D does not produce evidence sufficient to rebut the presumption.
It not only raises such presumption but shifts the ultimate burden of proof to the D and requires him to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the injury was not caused by his negligence.
In ordinary cases, res ipsa merely makes a case for the jury.