HW Objectives:

Provide Students with the opportunity to practice finding the law through WestLaw Campus Research and Google Scholar;

Provide Students with the opportunity to develop the skills needed to read, understand and summarize judicial opinions and to learn the language of the law.

Provide Students with the opportunity to study the basics of Product Liability Law in New Jersey and learn how law is applied to facts of individual cases.

Section I.

This Section requires you to find several cases and identify whether a Federal or a State Court issued the judicial opinion in the case cited. Each correct response is worth one (1) point. Maximum points for this Section equals five (5) points.

1. Walus v. Pfizer, Inc., 812 F. Supp. 41 (D.N.J. 1993)

2. Trump v. OBrien, 29 A.3d 1090 (N.J. Super. 2011)

3. Qualitex Co. v. Jacobson Products Co., 514 U.S. 159 (1995)

4. OBrien v. Muskin Corp., 94 N.J. 169 (1993)

5. Repola v. Morbark Industries, 934 F.2d 483 (3d Cir. 1991)

Section II.

This Section requires you to identify whether the Court issuing the judicial opinion in each of the following cases is a trial court or an appellate court. Each correct response is worth one (1) point. Maximum points for this section equal ten (10) points.

1. Patch v. Hillerich & Bradsby Co., 257 P.3d 383 (Mont. 2011)

2. Walus v. Pfizer, Inc., 812 F. Supp. 41 (D.N.J. 1993)

3. Rogath v. Siebenmann, 129 F.3d 902 (7th Cir. 1997)

4. Schock v. Ronderos, 394 N.W.2d 697 (N.D. 1986)

5. Trump v. OBrien, 29 A.3d 1090 (N.J. Super. 2011)

6. Qualitex Co. v. Jacobson Products Co., 514 U.S. 159 (1995)

7. OBrien v. Muskin Corp., 94 N.J. 169 (1993)

8. Ventas, Inc. v. HCP, Inc., 647 F.3d 291 (6th Cir. 2011)

9. Repola v. Morbark Industries, 934 F.2d 483 (3d Cir. 1991)

10. Palsgraf v. Long Island R.R. Co., 162 N.E. 99 (N.Y. 1928)

Section III.

This Section requires each student to find and read the case of Walus v. Pfizer, Inc., 812 F. Supp. 41 (D.N.J. 1993) and to respond correctly to the following questions regarding the case. Briefly, the case involves several allegations, including an allegation of a product defect, by a heart valve patient against the manufacturer/pharmaceutical company of the implanted heart valve. Your correct responses to each of the questions below are worth a maximum total of fifteen (15) points.

1. Identify and state the primary legal issue in the case that the Court was compelled to resolve. (5 Points)

2. State whether the Court resolved the issue after a trial or during a pre-trial motion. (3 Points).

3. Explain how the Court resolved the primary legal issue in the case and be sure to identify the relevant legal principle(s) that the Court relied upon to do so. (7 Points).