res ipsa loquitur

The thing speaks for itself. The rule that proof that the thing which caused the injury to the plaintiff was under the control and management of the defendant, and that the occurrence was such as in the ordinary course of things would not have happened if those who had its control or management had used proper care, affords sufficient evidence, or, as sometimes stated by the courts, reasonable evidence, in the absence of explanation by the defendant, that the injury arose from, or was caused by, the defendant's want of care. 38 Am J1st Negl § 295. The three essential elements of the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur are: (1) the instrumentality must be under the control or management of the defendant; (2) the circumstances, according to common knowledge and experience, must create a clear inference that the accident would not have happened if the defendant had not been negligent; and (3) the plaintiff's injury must have resulted from the accident. Lewis v Wolk, 312 Ky 536, 228 SW2d 432, 16 ALR2d 974. The term means "the thing speaks for itself," and that means the thing or instrumentality involved speaks for itself. It clearly does not mean the accident speaks for itself. It means that when the initial fact, namely what thing or instrumentality caused the accident has been shown then, and not before, an inference arises that the injury or damage occurred by reason of the negligence of the party who had it under his exclusive control. The inference of negligence arising from the initially established fact compels the defendant, in order to relieve himself of liability, to move forward with his proof to rebut the inference of negligence. Travelers Ins. Co. v Hulme, 168 Kan 483, 213 P2d 645, 16 ALR2d 793.