Discussion 02.3: Res Ipsa Loquitur
Scenario (based on a real Missouri case): At a local Missouri hospital a patient had a total right knee replacement (arthoplasty) under general anesthesia. However, upon awakening from the anesthesia, he immediately experienced pain in his right hand, arm and shoulder which was not present before the surgery. This was not an expected complication from the procedure. The patient sued the hospital and the surgeon for medical malpractice.
- Discuss why the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur would apply in this case.
- How would shifting the burden of proof from the plaintiff to the defendants using res ipsa loquitur be helpful? Would the plaintiff be able to make a normal case for negligence without proving exactly what took place while he was unconscious during surgery?
Solution Preview
Notably, the Res Ipsa Loquitur doctrine in tort law permits the presumption that a defendant was negligent during an accident that injured the plaintiff on the notion of circumstantial evidence if the accident was one that does not normally occur in the absence of negligence (Bal & Brenner, 2015). As such, the law permits the plaintiff to establish a rebuttable assumption of negligence on the part of the defendant by using circumstantial evidence (Bal & Brenner, 2015). This highlights that the doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitur will be applicable in this case as the plaintiff can establish a basis of negligence through the use of circumstantial evidence.
(315 words)