8 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 1940–2024 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Florida courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Chenoweth v. Kempgreen2 sentences2024Id. (quoting Chenoweth v. Kemp, 396 So. 2d 1122, 1125 (Fla. 1981)). 10 Additionally, to be entitled to argue res ipsa loquitur to the jury, a plaintiff must present sufficient evidence that "the instrumentality causing his or her injury was under the exclusive control of the defendant" and that the incident causing the injuries would not ordinarily occur "without negligence on the part of the one in control." Marrero, 486 So. 2d at 531 (quoting Goodyear, 358 So. 2d at 1341-42 ). 2015Id. (quoting Chenoweth v. Kemp, 396 So.2d 1122, 1125 (Fla.1981), receded from on other grounds in Sheffield v. Superior Ins. | 3 | 4 |
West Coast Hospital Ass'n v. Webbgreen1 sentence2024See Troupe v. Evans, 366 So. 2d 139, 140-41 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979) (citing Webb, 52 So. 2d 803 ). | 1 | 1 |
Payton v. Stategreen1 sentence2024See Troupe v. Evans, 366 So. 2d 139, 140-41 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979) (citing Webb, 52 So. 2d 803 ). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Borghese v. Bartley
green
2 sentences2024Id. (quoting Chenoweth v. Kemp, 396 So. 2d 1122, 1125 (Fla. 1981)). 10 Additionally, to be entitled to argue res ipsa loquitur to the jury, a plaintiff must present sufficient evidence that "the instrumentality causing his or her injury was under the exclusive control of the defendant" and that the incident causing the injuries would not ordinarily occur "without negligence on the part of the one in control." Marrero, 486 So. 2d at 531 (quoting Goodyear, 358 So. 2d at 1341-42 ). 2015Id. (quoting Chenoweth v. Kemp, 396 So.2d 1122, 1125 (Fla.1981), receded from on other grounds in Sheffield v. Superior Ins. | 2 | 2015–2024 |
Marrero v. Goldsmith
green
1 sentence2024Id. (quoting Chenoweth v. Kemp, 396 So. 2d 1122, 1125 (Fla. 1981)). 10 Additionally, to be entitled to argue res ipsa loquitur to the jury, a plaintiff must present sufficient evidence that "the instrumentality causing his or her injury was under the exclusive control of the defendant" and that the incident causing the injuries would not ordinarily occur "without negligence on the part of the one in control." Marrero, 486 So. 2d at 531 (quoting Goodyear, 358 So. 2d at 1341-42 ). | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Hughes Supply, Inc.
green
1 sentence2024Id. (quoting Chenoweth v. Kemp, 396 So. 2d 1122, 1125 (Fla. 1981)). 10 Additionally, to be entitled to argue res ipsa loquitur to the jury, a plaintiff must present sufficient evidence that "the instrumentality causing his or her injury was under the exclusive control of the defendant" and that the incident causing the injuries would not ordinarily occur "without negligence on the part of the one in control." Marrero, 486 So. 2d at 531 (quoting Goodyear, 358 So. 2d at 1341-42 ). | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Shell v. Peoples Bank
green
1 sentence2015Id. (quoting Chenoweth v. Kemp, 396 So. 2d 1122, 1125 (Fla. 1981), receded from on other grounds in Sheffield v. Superior Ins. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Grubbs v. McShane
neutral
2 sentences1965We specifically reject the contention that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is applicable in malpractice cases, in accordance with the following authorities: Foster v. Thornton, 125 Fla. 699 , 170 So. 459 ; Grubbs v. McShane, 144 Fla. 585 , 198 So. 208 ; Hine v. Fox, Fla. 1956, 89 So.2d 13 ; Crovella v. Cochrane, Fla.App. 1958, 102 So.2d 307 . 1965We specifically reject the contention that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is applicable in malpractice cases, in accordance with the following authorities: Foster v. Thornton, 125 Fla. 699 , 170 So. 459 ; Grubbs v. McShane, 144 Fla. 585 , 198 So. 208 ; Hine v. Fox, Fla. 1956, 89 So.2d 13 ; Crovella v. Cochrane, Fla.App. 1958, 102 So.2d 307 . | 1 | 1965–1965 |
Foster v. Thornton
green
2 sentences1965We specifically reject the contention that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is applicable in malpractice cases, in accordance with the following authorities: Foster v. Thornton, 125 Fla. 699 , 170 So. 459 ; Grubbs v. McShane, 144 Fla. 585 , 198 So. 208 ; Hine v. Fox, Fla. 1956, 89 So.2d 13 ; Crovella v. Cochrane, Fla.App. 1958, 102 So.2d 307 . 1965We specifically reject the contention that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is applicable in malpractice cases, in accordance with the following authorities: Foster v. Thornton, 125 Fla. 699 , 170 So. 459 ; Grubbs v. McShane, 144 Fla. 585 , 198 So. 208 ; Hine v. Fox, Fla. 1956, 89 So.2d 13 ; Crovella v. Cochrane, Fla.App. 1958, 102 So.2d 307 . | 1 | 1965–1965 |
Hine v. Fox
green
1 sentence1965We specifically reject the contention that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is applicable in malpractice cases, in accordance with the following authorities: Foster v. Thornton, 125 Fla. 699 , 170 So. 459 ; Grubbs v. McShane, 144 Fla. 585 , 198 So. 208 ; Hine v. Fox, Fla. 1956, 89 So.2d 13 ; Crovella v. Cochrane, Fla.App. 1958, 102 So.2d 307 . | 1 | 1965–1965 |
Crovella v. Cochrane
green
1 sentence1965We specifically reject the contention that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is applicable in malpractice cases, in accordance with the following authorities: Foster v. Thornton, 125 Fla. 699 , 170 So. 459 ; Grubbs v. McShane, 144 Fla. 585 , 198 So. 208 ; Hine v. Fox, Fla. 1956, 89 So.2d 13 ; Crovella v. Cochrane, Fla.App. 1958, 102 So.2d 307 . | 1 | 1965–1965 |
Schott v. Pancoast Properties
green
1 sentence1961We are also so inclined by the language employed by the Supreme Court of Florida in Schott v. Pancoast Properties, supra, and this court’s holding in W. | 1 | 1961–1961 |
Standard Lumber Co. v. Grantham
green
1 sentence1946The case of Foster v. Thornton, 113 Fla. 600 , 152 So. 667 , held that the fatal result of a treatment by a physcian was not alone sufficient to bring the case within the res ipsa rule, but the case was finally decided on the question of the sufficiency of the circumstantial evidence introduced by plaintiff to prove the negligence alleged. | 1 | 1946–1946 |
Foster v. Thornton
green
1 sentence1946The case of Foster v. Thornton, 113 Fla. 600 , 152 So. 667 , held that the fatal result of a treatment by a physcian was not alone sufficient to bring the case within the res ipsa rule, but the case was finally decided on the question of the sufficiency of the circumstantial evidence introduced by plaintiff to prove the negligence alleged. | 1 | 1946–1946 |
Durbin v. Humphrey Co.
green
1 sentence1940In Durbin v. Humphrey Co., 133 Ohio St. 367 , 14 N. E. (2) 5, it was said: “One of the grounds of negligence alleged in the petition in the instant case is that the amusement device was operated ‘at such a rate of speed as to cause the plaintiff *856 to be thrown about in said car.’ The evidence is to the effect that appellee had ridden on this device a number of times before; that on the occasion complained of the speed of operation was more rapid and the force of the tilting and resulting jolt were more violent than ever before; that the unusual rapidity of the speed and the violence of the | 1 | 1940–1940 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.