Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Alaska opinions name it 1 courts 1962–2014 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Alaska 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 |
|---|---|---|
Widmyer v. Southeast Skyways, Inc.green2 sentences2014See Widmyer, 584 P.2d at 11-12 (reasoning that a possible explanation of events did not preclude res ipsa loquitur instruction when there were no survivors to testify, there was no direct evidence of accident's cause, and there was heavy reliance on expert witnesses); see also State Farm, 788 P.2d at 731 (allowing a res ipsa loquitur instruction when there were no eyewitnesses and only expert inferences as evidence of incident's cause). . 2014Because the jury received a complete account 28 Crawford v. Rogers, 406 P.2d 189, 193 (Alaska 1965). 29 See Widmyer, 584 P.2d at 11-12 (reasoning that a possible explanation of events did not preclude res ipsa loquitur instruction when there were no survivors to testify, there was no direct evidence of accident’s cause, and there was heavy reliance on expert witnesses); see also State Farm, 788 P.2d at 731 (allowing a res ipsa loquitur instruction when there were no eyewitnesses and only expert inferences as evidence of incident’s cause). 30 Evans v. Buchner, 386 P.2d 836, 837 (Alaska 1963) (h | 2 | 2 |
Crawford v. Rogersgreen2 sentences2014Because the jury received a complete account 28 Crawford v. Rogers, 406 P.2d 189, 193 (Alaska 1965). 29 See Widmyer, 584 P.2d at 11-12 (reasoning that a possible explanation of events did not preclude res ipsa loquitur instruction when there were no survivors to testify, there was no direct evidence of accident’s cause, and there was heavy reliance on expert witnesses); see also State Farm, 788 P.2d at 731 (allowing a res ipsa loquitur instruction when there were no eyewitnesses and only expert inferences as evidence of incident’s cause). 30 Evans v. Buchner, 386 P.2d 836, 837 (Alaska 1963) (h 2014Because the jury received a complete account 28 Crawford v. Rogers, 406 P.2d 189, 193 (Alaska 1965). 29 See Widmyer, 584 P.2d at 11-12 (reasoning that a possible explanation of events did not preclude res ipsa loquitur instruction when there were no survivors to testify, there was no direct evidence of accident’s cause, and there was heavy reliance on expert witnesses); see also State Farm, 788 P.2d at 731 (allowing a res ipsa loquitur instruction when there were no eyewitnesses and only expert inferences as evidence of incident’s cause). 30 Evans v. Buchner, 386 P.2d 836, 837 (Alaska 1963) (h | 1 | 2 |
Evans v. Buchnergreen2 sentences2014Evans v. Buchner, 386 P.2d 836, 837 (Alaska 1963) (holding res ipsa loquitur inapplicable in car accident suit when driver "explained to the best of his recollection everything that occurred prior to the [car] overturning"). . 2014Because the jury received a complete account 28 Crawford v. Rogers, 406 P.2d 189, 193 (Alaska 1965). 29 See Widmyer, 584 P.2d at 11-12 (reasoning that a possible explanation of events did not preclude res ipsa loquitur instruction when there were no survivors to testify, there was no direct evidence of accident’s cause, and there was heavy reliance on expert witnesses); see also State Farm, 788 P.2d at 731 (allowing a res ipsa loquitur instruction when there were no eyewitnesses and only expert inferences as evidence of incident’s cause). 30 Evans v. Buchner, 386 P.2d 836, 837 (Alaska 1963) (h | 1 | 1 |
State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Municipality of Anchoragegreen2 sentences2014See Widmyer, 584 P.2d at 11-12 (reasoning that a possible explanation of events did not preclude res ipsa loquitur instruction when there were no survivors to testify, there was no direct evidence of accident's cause, and there was heavy reliance on expert witnesses); see also State Farm, 788 P.2d at 731 (allowing a res ipsa loquitur instruction when there were no eyewitnesses and only expert inferences as evidence of incident's cause). . 2014Because the jury received a complete account 28 Crawford v. Rogers, 406 P.2d 189, 193 (Alaska 1965). 29 See Widmyer, 584 P.2d at 11-12 (reasoning that a possible explanation of events did not preclude res ipsa loquitur instruction when there were no survivors to testify, there was no direct evidence of accident’s cause, and there was heavy reliance on expert witnesses); see also State Farm, 788 P.2d at 731 (allowing a res ipsa loquitur instruction when there were no eyewitnesses and only expert inferences as evidence of incident’s cause). 30 Evans v. Buchner, 386 P.2d 836, 837 (Alaska 1963) (h | 1 | 1 |
Bertram v. Harrisgreen1 sentence1971Mallonee v. Finch, 413 P.2d 159 , 162 n. 11 (Alaska 1966); [7] Maddocks v. Bennett, 456 P.2d 453, 460 (Alaska 1969); Bertram v. Harris, 423 P.2d 909, 915 (Alaska 1967). [8] Quite separate and distinct are those cases dealing with the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. | 1 | 1 |
Maddocks v. Bennettgreen1 sentence1971Mallonee v. Finch, 413 P.2d 159 , 162 n. 11 (Alaska 1966); [7] Maddocks v. Bennett, 456 P.2d 453, 460 (Alaska 1969); Bertram v. Harris, 423 P.2d 909, 915 (Alaska 1967). [8] Quite separate and distinct are those cases dealing with the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. | 1 | 1 |
Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co. v. Martingreen2 sentences1962Co. v. Martin, 283 U.S. 209, 214 , 51 S.Ct. 453 , 75 L.Ed. 983, 987 (1931); Benton v. Blair, supra, note 8 . . 12 N.J.Super. 549 , 79 A.2d 894 (1951). . 195 Wash. 240 , 80 P.2d 766 (1938); cf. Wellons v. Wiley, 24 Wash.2d 543 , 166 P.2d 852, 854 (1946), explaining that in so holding the court was not applying the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. . 159 Cal.App.2d 690 , 324 P.2d 703, 708 (1958). . 318 P.2d 410, 413 (Okl.1957). . 255 Wis. 312 , 38 N.W.2d 483, 484 (1949). . 1962Co. v. Martin, 283 U.S. 209, 214 , 51 S.Ct. 453 , 75 L.Ed. 983, 987 (1931); Benton v. Blair, supra, note 8 . . 12 N.J.Super. 549 , 79 A.2d 894 (1951). . 195 Wash. 240 , 80 P.2d 766 (1938); cf. Wellons v. Wiley, 24 Wash.2d 543 , 166 P.2d 852, 854 (1946), explaining that in so holding the court was not applying the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. . 159 Cal.App.2d 690 , 324 P.2d 703, 708 (1958). . 318 P.2d 410, 413 (Okl.1957). . 255 Wis. 312 , 38 N.W.2d 483, 484 (1949). . | 1 | 1 |
Scott v. MacKeygreen2 sentences1962Super. 549 , 79 A.2d 894 (1951). [11] 195 Wash. 240 , 80 P.2d 766 (1938); cf. Wellons v. Wiley, 24 Wash.2d 543 , 166 P.2d 852, 854 (1946), explaining that in so holding the court was not applying the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. [12] 159 Cal. App.2d 690 , 324 P.2d 703, 708 (1958). [13] 318 P.2d 410, 413 (Okl. 1957). [14] 255 Wis. 312 , 38 N.W.2d 483, 484 (1949). [16] At the time of the collision applicable territorial law and regulations governing vehicles meeting on the highway stated: "§ 50-4-1. 1962Super. 549 , 79 A.2d 894 (1951). [11] 195 Wash. 240 , 80 P.2d 766 (1938); cf. Wellons v. Wiley, 24 Wash.2d 543 , 166 P.2d 852, 854 (1946), explaining that in so holding the court was not applying the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. [12] 159 Cal. App.2d 690 , 324 P.2d 703, 708 (1958). [13] 318 P.2d 410, 413 (Okl. 1957). [14] 255 Wis. 312 , 38 N.W.2d 483, 484 (1949). [16] At the time of the collision applicable territorial law and regulations governing vehicles meeting on the highway stated: "§ 50-4-1. | 1 | 1 |
Wellons v. Wileygreen2 sentences1962Super. 549 , 79 A.2d 894 (1951). [11] 195 Wash. 240 , 80 P.2d 766 (1938); cf. Wellons v. Wiley, 24 Wash.2d 543 , 166 P.2d 852, 854 (1946), explaining that in so holding the court was not applying the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. [12] 159 Cal. App.2d 690 , 324 P.2d 703, 708 (1958). [13] 318 P.2d 410, 413 (Okl. 1957). [14] 255 Wis. 312 , 38 N.W.2d 483, 484 (1949). [16] At the time of the collision applicable territorial law and regulations governing vehicles meeting on the highway stated: "§ 50-4-1. 1962Super. 549 , 79 A.2d 894 (1951). [11] 195 Wash. 240 , 80 P.2d 766 (1938); cf. Wellons v. Wiley, 24 Wash.2d 543 , 166 P.2d 852, 854 (1946), explaining that in so holding the court was not applying the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. [12] 159 Cal. App.2d 690 , 324 P.2d 703, 708 (1958). [13] 318 P.2d 410, 413 (Okl. 1957). [14] 255 Wis. 312 , 38 N.W.2d 483, 484 (1949). [16] At the time of the collision applicable territorial law and regulations governing vehicles meeting on the highway stated: "§ 50-4-1. | 1 | 1 |
Kempfer v. Boisgreen2 sentences1962Super. 549 , 79 A.2d 894 (1951). [11] 195 Wash. 240 , 80 P.2d 766 (1938); cf. Wellons v. Wiley, 24 Wash.2d 543 , 166 P.2d 852, 854 (1946), explaining that in so holding the court was not applying the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. [12] 159 Cal. App.2d 690 , 324 P.2d 703, 708 (1958). [13] 318 P.2d 410, 413 (Okl. 1957). [14] 255 Wis. 312 , 38 N.W.2d 483, 484 (1949). [16] At the time of the collision applicable territorial law and regulations governing vehicles meeting on the highway stated: "§ 50-4-1. 1962Super. 549 , 79 A.2d 894 (1951). [11] 195 Wash. 240 , 80 P.2d 766 (1938); cf. Wellons v. Wiley, 24 Wash.2d 543 , 166 P.2d 852, 854 (1946), explaining that in so holding the court was not applying the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. [12] 159 Cal. App.2d 690 , 324 P.2d 703, 708 (1958). [13] 318 P.2d 410, 413 (Okl. 1957). [14] 255 Wis. 312 , 38 N.W.2d 483, 484 (1949). [16] At the time of the collision applicable territorial law and regulations governing vehicles meeting on the highway stated: "§ 50-4-1. | 1 | 1 |
Garner v. Myersgreen2 sentences1962Super. 549 , 79 A.2d 894 (1951). [11] 195 Wash. 240 , 80 P.2d 766 (1938); cf. Wellons v. Wiley, 24 Wash.2d 543 , 166 P.2d 852, 854 (1946), explaining that in so holding the court was not applying the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. [12] 159 Cal. App.2d 690 , 324 P.2d 703, 708 (1958). [13] 318 P.2d 410, 413 (Okl. 1957). [14] 255 Wis. 312 , 38 N.W.2d 483, 484 (1949). [16] At the time of the collision applicable territorial law and regulations governing vehicles meeting on the highway stated: "§ 50-4-1. 1962Co. v. Martin, 283 U.S. 209, 214 , 51 S.Ct. 453 , 75 L.Ed. 983, 987 (1931); Benton v. Blair, supra, note 8 . . 12 N.J.Super. 549 , 79 A.2d 894 (1951). . 195 Wash. 240 , 80 P.2d 766 (1938); cf. Wellons v. Wiley, 24 Wash.2d 543 , 166 P.2d 852, 854 (1946), explaining that in so holding the court was not applying the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. . 159 Cal.App.2d 690 , 324 P.2d 703, 708 (1958). . 318 P.2d 410, 413 (Okl.1957). . 255 Wis. 312 , 38 N.W.2d 483, 484 (1949). . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alaska. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Anderton v. Montgomery
green
2 sentences1990Anderton, 607 P.2d at 833-34 . 1990Anderton, 607 P.2d at 833-34 . | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Mallonee v. Finch
green
1 sentence1971Mallonee v. Finch, 413 P.2d 159 , 162 n. 11 (Alaska 1966); [7] Maddocks v. Bennett, 456 P.2d 453, 460 (Alaska 1969); Bertram v. Harris, 423 P.2d 909, 915 (Alaska 1967). [8] Quite separate and distinct are those cases dealing with the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. | 1 | 1971–1971 |
Thaddeus G. Benton v. Francis M. Blair
green
1 sentence1962Co. v. Martin, 283 U.S. 209, 214 , 51 S.Ct. 453 , 75 L.Ed. 983, 987 (1931); Benton v. Blair, supra, note 8 . . 12 N.J.Super. 549 , 79 A.2d 894 (1951). . 195 Wash. 240 , 80 P.2d 766 (1938); cf. Wellons v. Wiley, 24 Wash.2d 543 , 166 P.2d 852, 854 (1946), explaining that in so holding the court was not applying the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. . 159 Cal.App.2d 690 , 324 P.2d 703, 708 (1958). . 318 P.2d 410, 413 (Okl.1957). . 255 Wis. 312 , 38 N.W.2d 483, 484 (1949). . | 1 | 1962–1962 |
Weaver v. Windust
neutral
2 sentences1962Super. 549 , 79 A.2d 894 (1951). [11] 195 Wash. 240 , 80 P.2d 766 (1938); cf. Wellons v. Wiley, 24 Wash.2d 543 , 166 P.2d 852, 854 (1946), explaining that in so holding the court was not applying the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. [12] 159 Cal. App.2d 690 , 324 P.2d 703, 708 (1958). [13] 318 P.2d 410, 413 (Okl. 1957). [14] 255 Wis. 312 , 38 N.W.2d 483, 484 (1949). [16] At the time of the collision applicable territorial law and regulations governing vehicles meeting on the highway stated: "§ 50-4-1. 1962Super. 549 , 79 A.2d 894 (1951). [11] 195 Wash. 240 , 80 P.2d 766 (1938); cf. Wellons v. Wiley, 24 Wash.2d 543 , 166 P.2d 852, 854 (1946), explaining that in so holding the court was not applying the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. [12] 159 Cal. App.2d 690 , 324 P.2d 703, 708 (1958). [13] 318 P.2d 410, 413 (Okl. 1957). [14] 255 Wis. 312 , 38 N.W.2d 483, 484 (1949). [16] At the time of the collision applicable territorial law and regulations governing vehicles meeting on the highway stated: "§ 50-4-1. | 1 | 1962–1962 |
Layton v. Healy
green
2 sentences1962Super. 549 , 79 A.2d 894 (1951). [11] 195 Wash. 240 , 80 P.2d 766 (1938); cf. Wellons v. Wiley, 24 Wash.2d 543 , 166 P.2d 852, 854 (1946), explaining that in so holding the court was not applying the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. [12] 159 Cal. App.2d 690 , 324 P.2d 703, 708 (1958). [13] 318 P.2d 410, 413 (Okl. 1957). [14] 255 Wis. 312 , 38 N.W.2d 483, 484 (1949). [16] At the time of the collision applicable territorial law and regulations governing vehicles meeting on the highway stated: "§ 50-4-1. 1962Co. v. Martin, 283 U.S. 209, 214 , 51 S.Ct. 453 , 75 L.Ed. 983, 987 (1931); Benton v. Blair, supra, note 8 . . 12 N.J.Super. 549 , 79 A.2d 894 (1951). . 195 Wash. 240 , 80 P.2d 766 (1938); cf. Wellons v. Wiley, 24 Wash.2d 543 , 166 P.2d 852, 854 (1946), explaining that in so holding the court was not applying the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. . 159 Cal.App.2d 690 , 324 P.2d 703, 708 (1958). . 318 P.2d 410, 413 (Okl.1957). . 255 Wis. 312 , 38 N.W.2d 483, 484 (1949). . | 1 | 1962–1962 |
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.