Which of the following is a plaintiff NOT required to demonstrate in order to be successful in making a claim under res ipsa loquitor?
A)The alleged negligence is within the scope of the defendant's duty to the plaintiff.
B)Other possible causes of the incident that harmed the plaintiff have been ruled out.
C)The event was of a kind that normally happens only if there is negligence.
D)There is direct evidence of the defendant's lack of care.
E)The event which caused harm was a kind of event that ordinarily does not occur.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

A)The res ipsa loquitor doctrine allows the court to infer that,more likely than not,
the defendant's negligence was the cause of the plaintiff's harm,even with no direct evidence of the defendant's lack of care.
B)The res ipsa loquitor doctrine allows the court to infer that,more likely than not,the defendant's negligence was the cause of the plaintiff's harm,even with no direct evidence of the defendant's lack of care.
C)The res ipsa loquitor doctrine allows the court to infer that,more likely than not,the defendant's negligence was the cause of the plaintiff's harm,even with no direct evidence of the defendant's lack of care.
D)The res ipsa loquitor doctrine allows the court to infer that,more likely than not,the defendant's negligence was the cause of the plaintiff's harm,even with no direct evidence of the defendant's lack of care.
E)The res ipsa loquitor doctrine allows the court to infer that,more likely than not,the defendant's negligence was the cause of the plaintiff's harm,even with no direct evidence of the defendant's lack of care.

Which of the Following Is a Plaintiff NOT Required to Demonstrate