Connection lost
Server error
Escola v. Coca Cola Bottling Co. Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A waitress was injured when a Coca-Cola bottle exploded. The court affirmed a negligence verdict based on res ipsa loquitur, while a famous concurrence argued for imposing strict liability on manufacturers for injuries caused by defective products.
Legal Significance: This case is seminal for Justice Traynor’s concurring opinion, which provided the foundational legal and public policy arguments for the modern doctrine of strict products liability, later adopted in Greenman v. Yuba Power Products.
Escola v. Coca Cola Bottling Co. Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Plaintiff, a waitress, was injured when a glass bottle of Coca-Cola exploded in her hand. The defendant bottling company had delivered the case of bottles to her employer’s restaurant 36 hours earlier, where it remained undisturbed until the plaintiff moved it. The plaintiff testified that she was carefully transferring bottles from the case to a refrigerator and that the bottle did not strike any hard surface before it exploded. Unable to show any specific negligent act by the defendant, the plaintiff relied exclusively on the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur to establish the defendant’s liability. The defendant introduced evidence of its safety procedures, including pressure tests and visual inspections, to demonstrate its exercise of due care. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff, and the defendant appealed.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Can the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur be used to establish a bottler’s negligence when a sealed beverage bottle explodes after it has left the bottler’s physical control?
Yes. The judgment for the plaintiff is affirmed. The doctrine of res Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est la
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Can the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur be used to establish a bottler’s negligence when a sealed beverage bottle explodes after it has left the bottler’s physical control?
Conclusion
While the majority's holding expanded the application of res ipsa loquitur in Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exerci
Legal Rule
The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur applies in a products liability case Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure d
Legal Analysis
The majority opinion expanded the utility of res ipsa loquitur in products Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea co
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- Res ipsa loquitur can apply to a manufacturer even after a
