To use res ipsa loquitor the plaintiff needs to show:

that the accident is of a type that ordinarily does not occur without someone's negligence

that the defendant was in exclusive control of the instrumentality that caused the damage, and

that the plaintiff was free from fault.

(The last of these three conditions is problematic. Recall that these rules developed when the general rule was that a plaintiff's contributory negligence barred recovery.)

Note that the plaintiff need not show that accidents of this type cannot occur without someone's negligence. It is enough that they ordinarily do not occur without someone's negligence.

Note that the plaintiff must show all 3 of these conditions in order to use res ipsa loquitor. It would seem that the plaintiff has met the first requirement. People do not ordinarily hurt their heads on a grab handle unless someone has been negligent.

What about the other two requirements?

Link back to assignment 4.