NCJ Number
174992
Journal
Seton Hall Law Review Volume: 28 Issue: 4 Dated: 1998 Pages: 1081-1101
Date Published
1998
Length
21 pages
Annotation
Using two hypothetical products-liability cases, the author, a New Jersey State appellate court judge, discusses how a State supreme court arrives at its decision, rather than forecasting what the outcome should be; this is a discussion of how decisional law is made.
Abstract
The author begins by stating that an opinion has two main purposes: dispute resolution and lawmaking. Issue-framing for an opinion-writer is as important as it is for a brief-writer. Unless the issues are clearly identified, the opinion is likely to be poorly organized. The author notes that he usually states the type of case and the principal issue in the first sentence of the opinion and then follows with the court's holding. The opinion should always represent the combined efforts of the court. In the area of products liability law, judges and justices are both consumers of products and law givers. Appellate judicial opinions in New Jersey (the author's State), and perhaps across the country, have been developing a new jurisprudence of products liability since the tort reform movement began in the 1980s. New Jersey has abrogated a common-law products liability cause of action outside of the statute when a design defect in consumer products only causes damage to the product itself. New Jersey has also departed from common law in holding that the manufacturer of component parts to be assembled into a machine or a finished product has no duty to provide a specific warning unless a design or manufacturing defect is proven. 74 footnotes