Smith, Gambrell & Russell, LLP Smith, Gambrell & Russell, LLP

Menu Search

Experience

  • Industries
  • Services
  • Professionals

Resources

  • SGR Insights
  • News & Events
  • Client Access

About

  • The Firm
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • SGR Alumni
Share
  • Home
  • Publications
  • Articles & White Papers
  • Litigation/Trial Law
  • Hit by Falling Towel Dispenser – Res Ipsa Loquitur: “The Thing Speaks for Itself”

Hit by Falling Towel Dispenser – Res Ipsa Loquitur: “The Thing Speaks for Itself”

Res ipsa loquitur is the Latin phrase describing a legal doctrine that infers negligence from the very nature of an accident or injury in the absence of any behavior or activity by the aggrieved person.

In most negligence cases, the plaintiff must establish a duty of care, breach of that duty, causation, and injury. But under res ipsa loquitur, the first three elements are inferred from an injury that does not ordinarily occur without negligence. 

In such cases, the injury is caused by an agency or instrumentality under the defendant’s exclusive control. Or the injury-causing accident is not caused by any voluntary act or contribution of the plaintiff.

Typical cases involve airplane accidents, elevator dropping down shafts, or collateral injury during routine surgery. But, as a factually idiosyncratic case demonstrates, the doctrine has been applied to the more mundane. 

Alberto Galue filed a personal injury action after his head was allegedly hit by a towel dispenser/trash receptacle unit installed by Spaccarelli Construction Co., Inc. The unit fell out of a bathroom wall in a building owned by Independent 270 Madison LLC and 270 Madison Ave Assocs LLC and operated by ABS Partners Real Estate LLC.

Charging the jury on the doctrine was dependent upon the proof adduced at trial.

The appeal’s court found that the trial court improvidently exercised its discretion in declining to charge the jury on res ipsa loquitur. A res ipsa charge merely permits the jury to infer negligence from the circumstances of the occurrence. The doctrine does not require sole physical access to the instrumentality, causing the injury.

The trial court should also have charged that a violation of the Administrative Code of the City of New York § 28-301.1, which requires property owners to maintain their buildings in a safe condition, constitutes some evidence of negligence.  

Authored By

  • Metsch, Victor

More Articles

  • Partner Mitch Ackal Featured by Law360: Smith Gambrell Launches In Houston With Gray Reed Litigator
  • Partner Alan Wachs Featured by Jacksonville Daily Record: Impact Church suing new owner of Regency Square Mall
  • Partner Lisa Carrasco Featured by PlanSponsor: PBM Disclosure Push Intensifies as Congress Acts
  • Partner Mitch Ackal Featured by Texas Lawyer: Veteran Energy Specialist Joins Smith Gambrell & Russell to Lead Expansion to Houston
  • Partner Elizabeth Janczak Featured by Law360: 7th Circ. Probes Firm’s Oral Agreement To Fees From Fund
Smith, Gambrell & Russell, LLP

SGRLAW®

Experience

  • Industries
  • Services
  • Professionals

Resources

  • SGR Insights
  • News & Events
  • Client Access

About

  • The Firm
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • SGR Alumni

Notices

  • Site Terms
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookies Policy
  • Transparency In Coverage Rule

Languages

  • Español
  • Deutsch
  • 한국어
  • 日本語
  • 中文
  • Visit our Twitter profile
  • Visit our LinkedIn page
  • Visit our YouTube channel
  • Chambers and Partners Best Law Firms
Search
Remote Access

© 2026 Smith, Gambrell & Russell, LLP

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • More Networks
Share via
Facebook
X (Twitter)
LinkedIn
Mix
Email
Print
Copy Link
Powered by Social Snap
Copy link
CopyCopied
Powered by Social Snap
This website uses cookies to improve functionality and performance. If you continue browsing the site, you are giving implied consent to the use of cookies on this website.