Brown v. Poway Unified Sch. Dist. - 4 Cal. 4th 820, 15 Cal. Rptr. 2d 679, 843 P.2d 624 (1993)

Rule:

The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is defined by statute as a presumption affecting the burden of producing evidence. The presumption arises when the evidence satisfies three conditions: (1) the accident must be of a kind which ordinarily does not occur in the absence of someone's negligence; (2) it must be caused by an agency or instrumentality within the exclusive control of the defendant; (3) it must not have been due to any voluntary action or contribution on the part of the plaintiff. A presumption affecting the burden of producing evidence requires the trier of fact to assume the existence of the presumed fact unless the defendant introduces evidence to the contrary. The presumed fact, in this context, is that a proximate cause of the occurrence was some negligent conduct on the part of the defendant. If the defendant introduces evidence to the contrary, the trier of fact determines whether defendant was negligent without regard to the presumption, simply by weighing the evidence.

Facts:

Plaintiff Francis Brown, a self-employed computer repairman, was delivering computers to the Poway Unified School District’s (District’s) facilities building at 9:30 a.m. on Monday morning. Brown parked his van near a door and, with the help of a District employee, made five trips down a hallway between the van and the room where the computers were stored. On the last trip back to his van, Brown slipped and fell. The employees who helped Brown to his feet found a fresh slice of lunch meat stuck to the sole of his shoe. Brown sued the District. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the District. The appellate court reversed, concluding that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitor precluded summary judgment.

Issue:

Did the appellate court err in ruling that Brown could use res ipsa loquitur to establish a prima facie case against the District under Gov. Code, § 835, subd. (a)?

Answer:

Yes.

Conclusion:

The court reversed the judgment of the appellate court, concluding that res ipsa loquitor did not apply because there was no basis for a finding that Brown’s slip-and-fall was the type of accident that ordinarily would not occur in the absence of someone's negligence or that the slip-and-fall was caused by an agency or instrumentality that was within the District’s exclusive control. The court also determined that Brown could not rely on the doctrine of res ipsa loquitor to establish a prima facie case of negligence under Cal. Govt. Code § 835(a) because a public entity could be held liable under that section only upon an affirmative showing that an employee of the entity created or was involved in creating the dangerous condition.