Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Giron v. Bailey, 985 A.2d 1003 (2009)

Citation
Giron v. Bailey, 985 A.2d 1003 (2009)
Parent Document
Giron v. Bailey, 985 A.2d 1003 (2009)
Jurisdiction
Rhode Island (state)
Effective Date
2009-12-18

Other Sections in This Document (56)

Full Text

722 chars
Jane argues that even if she did deviate from the standard of care she owed the Girons, a jury could not determine, absent expert testimony, whether that deviation was the proximate cause of Cayetano’s fall and resulting injuries. This is so, she claims, because the Girons introduced no evidence that would show that a properly maintained railing could have supported Cayetano’s weight and the force with which he struck the railing, and thus prevented his fall. According to Jane, only an expert could testify to whether Cayetano fell because the railing was defective or, alternatively, because the force he exerted was such that even a properly installed and maintained railing could not withstand Cayetano’s impact. 7