Ed's Auto Shop repaired the left front and body of Maureen's car.Subsequently, she is injured in a head-on accident where her left headlight fails to illuminate properly.From the wreckage, it is determined that the headlight was disconnected.Expert engineers are prepared to testify that headlights "don't just become disconnected" and that the impact of the crash could not have caused the disconnection.In Maureen's case against Ed's for negligence in the repair of her vehicle, which doctrine will Maureen use to allow circumstantial evidence to prove that a breach in the standard of care caused her accident?

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

Maureen will use the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, which allows circumstantial evidence to prove negligence. This doctrine applies when (1) the accident was of a type that does not usually occur in the absence of negligence, (2) the instrumentality causing the injury was under the exclusive control of the defendant, and (3) the plaintiff did not contribute to the accident. In this case, the fact that the headlight was disconnected and headlights "don't just become disconnected" provides circumstantial evidence of Ed's negligence in the repair of Maureen's vehicle.

Ed's Auto Shop Repaired the Left Front and Body of Maureen's