1. You have three (3) hours to complete this exam.

2. This is a closed book exam.

3. This exam consists of two (2) parts. Part I is an essay question in 3 parts, worth 60% of the exam grade. Part II is True/False and Multiple Choice questions, worth 40% of the exam grade.

4. Please write your response to the essay question in the blue book(s) provided. Please write on one side of each page, and on every other line. Please write legibly.

5. Multiple choice and True/False questions are to be answered on the separate “ParSCORE TEST FORM” using pen or pencil and following the instructions on that form. If you change your answer, place a clear X through the wrong answer and mark the correct answer. A machine will score the exam and any ambiguities will be counted as a wrong answer.

6. Please mark your responses to the short answer questions directly on the exam page.

7. Write your exam number on this exam envelope, all used blue books, at the top of this exam packet, and on the ParScore answer sheet. Do not use your name, student ID number, or Social Security Number on any exam materials.

8. At the conclusion of the exam, return all test materials, including blue books, ParScore answer sheet, scratch paper, and this exam packet to the envelope and submit it to the proctor. DO NOT seal the envelope. Students who do not return all exam materials at the end of the exam may not be graded.

Essay Question – In 3 Parts (60% of exam)

Henri, a French citizen residing in the United States, was employed at The Factory, incorporated in Delaware and located in New York City, where he was seriously injured. While working on a drill press, a bit broke and metal shards penetrated his left eye, resulting in partial blindness. As a result of intense competition from Chinese manufacturers, The Factory had been on a campaign of cost cutting and was in the process of closing its doors to outsource production. Shortly after Henri’s injury, it shuttered its plant and went out of business. The Factory was wholly owned and very closely managed by Simpsons Ltd., a French-German joint venture located in the Bahamas, and comprised equally of Tecnikwerke, GmbH, of Hamburg, Germany, and the French-government-owned manufacturing concern, Altech, S.A. After shutting down The Factory, Simpsons Ltd. transferred production to WingWah Enterprises of Shanghai, PRC, a subsidiary of the Lotus Group, operated out of Taipai, Taiwan. By coincidence, WingWah was the maker of the low-cost drill bit which splintered and injured Henri, having sold it to The Factory as part of its sales to the New York region through a local distributor, which has since declared bankruptcy and ceased all activity. Simpsons Ltd. had directed The Factory to purchase the low-cost drill bit as a cost cutting measure.

1) Your law firm has taken Henri’s case on contingency and you have been tasked with developing a litigation strategy to secure the largest possible recovery. As part of your planning, you will want to identify the appropriate defendants, select the appropriate forum with due regard to all jurisdictional and service concerns, identify anticipated motions and other actions the defendant(s) may take, how you would respond to each, and, in general, indicate how the law firm intends to secure a favorable and enforceable judgment.

2) After filing your suit, you learn that Simpsons Ltd. has proceeded in the Courts of Paris, France to get an anti-suit injunction and declaratory relief absolving it of any responsibility for the broken drill bit or the accident. What response, if any, will you need to make, or should you make, and how might this affect your strategy?

3) While pursuing discovery in this case, you learn that the Lotus Group was established as a manufacturing and purchasing instrumentality of the Army of Taiwan and that WingWah’s design and quality specifications for the drill bit were provided by the Army, which remains WingWah’s largest purchaser. What effect, if any, will this have on your strategy?

END OF ESSAY QUESTION