From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brugh v. Fun-Tastic Rides Co.

Supreme Court of Washington.
Nov 6, 2019
194 Wash. 2d 1001 (Wash. 2019)

Opinion

No. 97503-5

11-06-2019

Jodi BRUGH, Respondent, v. FUN-TASTIC RIDES CO., et al., Petitioners.


ORDER

¶ 1 Department II of the Court, composed of Chief Justice Fairhurst and Justices Madsen, Stephens, González and Yu, considered at its November 5, 2019, Motion Calendar whether review should be granted pursuant to RAP 13.4(b) and unanimously agreed that the following order be entered.

¶ 2 IT IS ORDERED:

¶ 3 That the petition for review is granted only on the issue of whether, in a res ipsa loquitur analysis, the "result" that would not be expected without negligence may consist of the plaintiffs injury rather than the injury-causing act or occurrence. Any party may serve and file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of this order, see RAP 13.7(d).

For the Court

/s/ Fairhurst, C.J. CHIEF JUSTICE


Summaries of

Brugh v. Fun-Tastic Rides Co.

Supreme Court of Washington.
Nov 6, 2019
194 Wash. 2d 1001 (Wash. 2019)
Case details for

Brugh v. Fun-Tastic Rides Co.

Case Details

Full title:Jodi BRUGH, Respondent, v. FUN-TASTIC RIDES CO., et al., Petitioners.

Court:Supreme Court of Washington.

Date published: Nov 6, 2019

Citations

194 Wash. 2d 1001 (Wash. 2019)
451 P.3d 339

Citing Cases

Wells v. Nespelem Valley Elec. Coop., Inc.

¶ 12 A claim of general negligence has four elements: (1) duty, (2) breach, (3) damages, and (4) proximate…