Which scenario could likely invoke the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur?

The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, which translates to "the thing speaks for itself," is a legal principle that allows an inference of negligence to be drawn from the very nature of an accident or injury in the absence of direct evidence. This doctrine is typically applied in cases where the injury would not ordinarily occur without negligence, and the defendant had exclusive control of the situation.

In all the scenarios presented, an inference of negligence can be reasonably drawn because each involves circumstances where it is difficult for the plaintiff to prove exactly how the negligent act occurred, yet the outcomes suggest that negligence must have happened.

In the case of a surgeon operating on the wrong foot, it is evident that such an error cannot happen without some form of negligence or failure to adhere to standard protocols in patient care.

Similarly, teeth being damaged while a patient is under anesthesia points to a failure in the standard of care provided by the dental or medical professionals involved. This kind of loss or harm suggests that there was likely some negligent conduct because teeth should not be damaged during a procedure unless there’s a lapse in care.

Finally, a patient receiving an unintended procedure during surgery similarly indicates a serious breakdown in the standard of care. This scenario is particularly striking as it points to negligence that falls under