Res Ipsa Loquitur in Surgical Malpractice

You go in for surgery. The procedure is supposed to be routine — maybe a knee scope, a gallbladder removal, a cesarean section. You sign the consent forms. The anesthesiologist puts you under. And when you wake up, something is catastrophically wrong. There's nerve damage in a part of your body nowhere near where the surgeon was operating. You're told an instrument was left inside you. You have burns you can't explain. Or you went in for surgery on your right knee and they operated on your left.

You know something went wrong. But here's the problem: you were unconscious the entire time. You didn't see what happened. You have no idea who did what, or when, or how. The surgical team was the only group present, the only group with knowledge, and the only group in control. You're left with an injury you can't explain and no direct evidence of what caused it.

This is exactly the situation the law anticipated.

The Problem: You Were the Worst Witness to Your Own Injury

In a typical personal injury case, the injured person can describe what happened. They saw the truck run the red light. They watched the floor they slipped on. They can connect the defendant's action to their harm. But surgical patients are different. You were under general anesthesia. You were paralyzed, unconscious, and entirely dependent on the people in that operating room. Whatever happened, happened while you were powerless to observe it, prevent it, or even understand it until after the fact.

This creates a fundamental evidentiary problem. Normally, in a medical malpractice case, the plaintiff has to prove the specific act of negligence — what the doctor did wrong, how it deviated from the standard of care, and how that deviation caused the injury. But when the patient was unconscious and the only witnesses are the defendant and the defendant's colleagues, demanding that level of specificity can make justice impossible. The people who know what happened are the same people being accused of doing it wrong.

The law has a doctrine for exactly this situation. It's been around for over a century, and in Oklahoma it's codified by statute. It's called res ipsa loquitur — "the thing speaks for itself."

What Is Res Ipsa Loquitur?

Res ipsa loquitur is a legal principle that allows a jury to infer negligence from the circumstances of the injury itself, without requiring the plaintiff to identify the specific negligent act. The idea is simple: some injuries are so clearly the result of negligence that the injury alone is enough to get to a jury.

Oklahoma codifies this doctrine in 76 O.S. § 21, which establishes a presumption of negligence in medical care when three foundational facts are proven:

1. The plaintiff sustained an injury. This is usually straightforward — the patient woke up with a condition they didn't have before surgery.

2. The injury was proximately caused by an instrumentality solely within the defendant's control. In surgery, this element is powerful. The patient is unconscious. The surgical instruments, the anesthesia equipment, the sponges, the retractors — all of it is exclusively in the hands of the surgical team. The patient contributed nothing. The patient could contribute nothing.

3. The injury does not ordinarily occur in the absence of negligence. This is the heart of the doctrine. You don't wake up from knee surgery with a burn on your arm. Surgical sponges don't end up inside patients when everyone follows proper count procedures. Nerves far from the operative field don't get damaged during routine procedures — unless someone made a mistake.

When all three elements are established, the presumption of negligence arises, and the burden shifts. The defendant must come forward with evidence explaining how the injury occurred without negligence. If they can't, the jury is permitted to find negligence based on the circumstances alone.

When Res Ipsa Applies in Surgery

Not every bad surgical outcome triggers res ipsa loquitur. Surgery carries inherent risks, and some complications occur even with perfect care. The doctrine applies when the injury is the kind that shouldn't happen — the kind the medical community itself calls a "never event."

Retained surgical instruments and sponges are the textbook example. Operating rooms have strict count protocols for every sponge, needle, and instrument used during a procedure. When a sponge or clamp is left inside a patient's body, it means those protocols failed. This is the classic res ipsa scenario — it doesn't happen without negligence, and it was entirely within the surgical team's control. The Oklahoma Supreme Court addressed the foundational elements of res ipsa in medical negligence in Harder v. F.C. Clinton, Inc. (1997 OK 137), confirming that when these foundational facts are established, negligence may be inferred and the burden shifts to the defendant to rebut.

Wrong-site surgery — operating on the wrong knee, the wrong kidney, the wrong side of the brain — is another clear case. Pre-operative protocols require surgical teams to verify the correct site, mark it, and confirm it before making the first incision. When they operate on the wrong body part, every one of those safeguards failed.

Injuries remote from the surgical field raise immediate questions. If you go in for abdominal surgery and wake up with nerve damage in your arm, or you have a spinal procedure and come out with a burn on your thigh, the injury itself tells a story. These things don't happen during competent surgery. They suggest something — positioning, equipment, inattention — went wrong.

Anesthesia errors can also give rise to res ipsa claims. Overdoses, wrong medications, failure to monitor vital signs, and airway management failures during surgery are all situations where the patient was entirely dependent on the anesthesiologist's competence. When a patient suffers brain damage from oxygen deprivation during a procedure that should have been routine, the circumstances themselves suggest negligence.

How Res Ipsa Changes the Burden

In ordinary medical malpractice litigation, the plaintiff carries the entire burden. You must prove the standard of care, prove the doctor deviated from it, and prove that deviation caused the harm. In most cases, this requires expert testimony from another physician in the same specialty who can explain, step by step, what the defendant did wrong.

Res ipsa loquitur changes the equation. Once the three foundational elements are established, the plaintiff doesn't have to reconstruct every moment of the surgery. The jury can look at the outcome — a sponge left inside the body, a nerve severed far from the operative site, a burn with no explanation — and conclude that negligence occurred. The defendant must then produce evidence showing it didn't, or the jury is entitled to find liability.

This matters enormously in surgical cases because the operating room is a closed world. The medical records may be incomplete. The surgical team's recollections may be self-serving. The patient can't fill in the gaps because they were unconscious. Without res ipsa, some clear cases of negligence would be unprovable — not because negligence didn't happen, but because the only people who saw it happen are the ones who did it.

What Res Ipsa Doesn't Do

Res ipsa loquitur is powerful, but it has limits. It is not an automatic verdict for the plaintiff. It allows the jury to infer negligence — it doesn't require them to. The defendant can still present evidence showing that the injury occurred despite proper care, or that it resulted from a known risk of the procedure.

The doctrine also doesn't eliminate the need for all expert testimony. While it may reduce the need for an expert to identify the specific negligent act, experts may still be necessary to establish the foundational elements — particularly that the injury doesn't ordinarily occur absent negligence. Some injuries require medical knowledge to evaluate. A layperson might not know whether a particular complication can happen without negligence, and an expert's testimony may be needed to explain that it can't.

Oklahoma still requires an affidavit of merit before filing a malpractice lawsuit, under 63 O.S. § 1-1708.1E. Even in res ipsa cases, a qualified expert must confirm that the claim has merit before the lawsuit is filed. This means your attorney will need to engage a medical expert early — during case evaluation, before anything is filed with the court.

And res ipsa doesn't apply to every surgical complication. If the injury is a recognized risk of the procedure — one that occurs even with competent care — the doctrine won't apply. The key distinction is between risks inherent to the surgery and outcomes that signal something went wrong. A known complication rate doesn't mean negligence; a sponge left in your abdomen does.

What to Do After an Unexplained Surgical Injury

If you've come out of surgery with an injury you can't explain, time matters. Here's what you should do:

Request your complete medical records immediately. You're entitled to everything: the operative report, anesthesia records, nursing notes, pre-operative and post-operative notes, imaging, and lab results. The operative report may reveal details about what happened during the procedure. The anesthesia record tracks vital signs minute by minute. Your medical records are the backbone of any injury case, and in surgical malpractice cases they are absolutely critical.

Ask specifically for the surgical count sheet. Hospitals are required to count every sponge, needle, and instrument before and after surgery. If the count was off — or if the sheet is missing or incomplete — that's significant evidence.

Document everything from the moment you realize something is wrong. Photograph your injuries. Keep a journal of your symptoms, pain levels, and functional limitations. Note what doctors tell you about what happened and what they can't explain.

Don't accept vague explanations. "Complications happen" is not an answer. If the surgical team can't explain why you have an injury that shouldn't have occurred, that silence may itself be evidence.

Consult an attorney who handles surgical malpractice. These cases require medical-legal expertise, early expert engagement, and the resources to go up against hospital defense teams. The two-year statute of limitations for medical malpractice in Oklahoma starts from the date you discovered — or should have discovered — the injury. Do not wait.

Frequently Asked Questions

What does "res ipsa loquitur" mean?

It's Latin for "the thing speaks for itself." In legal terms, it means the injury is so clearly the result of negligence that you don't have to prove exactly what the defendant did wrong — the circumstances speak for themselves.

Does res ipsa loquitur apply to all surgical complications?

No. It applies when the injury is the type that doesn't ordinarily occur without negligence, was caused by something solely in the defendant's control, and the patient didn't contribute to it. Recognized surgical risks that occur even with competent care generally don't qualify.

Do I still need expert testimony in a res ipsa case?

Often yes. While the doctrine can reduce the need for an expert to identify the specific negligent act, experts may still be needed to establish that the type of injury doesn't normally occur absent negligence. Oklahoma also requires an affidavit of merit from a qualified expert before filing any malpractice lawsuit.

What are common examples of res ipsa in surgical cases?

Retained surgical instruments or sponges left inside the body, wrong-site surgery, nerve damage or burns in areas far from the surgical field, and anesthesia overdoses are all classic examples. These are injuries that simply don't happen when proper protocols are followed.

How long do I have to file a surgical malpractice claim in Oklahoma?

Oklahoma's statute of limitations for medical malpractice is generally two years from the date you discovered or should have discovered the injury. In some cases — such as when a retained instrument isn't found for months or years — the discovery rule may extend this timeline. Don't wait to consult an attorney, because the deadline is firm once triggered.

Can the hospital argue the injury was a known risk I consented to?

They will try. Informed consent forms list potential complications, and defendants will argue you accepted those risks. But res ipsa applies to injuries that go beyond recognized risks — outcomes that indicate a departure from competent care. Consenting to the risk of surgical infection is different from consenting to having a sponge left inside you.

What if multiple doctors and nurses were involved — who is liable?

Res ipsa can apply even when multiple providers were involved, as long as the injury was caused by an instrumentality within the collective control of the surgical team. Oklahoma courts can apportion liability among defendants, and the hospital itself may bear responsibility for systemic failures in surgical protocols.

---

This article is for general information only and is not legal advice.