Confirm favorite deletion?
Torts Keyed to Goldberg
Walter v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Facts
Antoinette Walter, an eighty-year-old woman, was diagnosed with cancer. Her oncologist, Stephen Ross, prescribed her Chlorambucil, a generic chemotherapy drug with the brand name Leukeran. Walter went to a Wal-Mart store in Maine to fill the prescription. At Wal-Mart, the pharmacist, Henry Lovin, did not fill Walter’s prescription with Chlorambucil or Leukeran.However,Lovin filled the presciption with Melphalen, which is a far stronger chemotherapy drug. Due to its strength and negative effects, doctors would Melphalenin smaller doses, for shorter periods, compared to Chlorambucil. When Walter received the refill, Lovin did not counsel Walter about Melphalen. Instead, Lovin only provided a paper with information about the drug. When Waltertook the prescribed dosage, she began to feel nauseas and obtained bruises and rashes. Although the paper with information hat Walter received from Lovin stated to contact the patient if the patient experienced bruising or rashing, Walter decided to wait a few days to contact Ross. When she spoke to Ross, Ross instructed her to stop the medication. Later that day, Walter was hospitalized for gastrointestinal bleeding. Walter was in the hospital for five weeks, and she had several infections, was unable to eat, and began to experience other problems associated with a weakened immune system. When the hospital allowed Walter’s release, she left the hospital in a considerably weaker physical and mental state. Due to the Melphalen, Walter’s cancer had decreased, but Walter’s medical bills increased to $71,042.63. Walter brought Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. for malpractice. At trial, Lovin testified he failed to meet the standard of care for pharmacist when he dispersed the wrong drug without undergoing appropriate procedures and without to Walter directly. Also, Lovin testified that Walter did not have a reason to doubt whether she had received the correct drug. Upon the conclusion of the trial, the judge granted Walter judgment as a matter of law and the jury awarded her $550,000. Wal-Mart appealed.
Only StudyBuddy Pro offers the complete Case Brief Anatomy*
Access the most important case brief elements for optimal case understanding.
*Case Brief Anatomy includes: Brief Prologue, Complete Case Brief, Brief Epilogue
- The Brief Prologue provides necessary case brief introductory information and includes:
Topic:
Identifies the topic of law and where this case fits within your course outline.Parties:
Identifies the cast of characters involved in the case.Procedural Posture & History:
Shares the case history with how lower courts have ruled on the matter.Case Key Terms, Acts, Doctrines, etc.:
A case specific Legal Term Dictionary.Case Doctrines, Acts, Statutes, Amendments and Treatises:
Identifies and Defines Legal Authority used in this case.
- The Case Brief is the complete case summarized and authored in the traditional Law School I.R.A.C. format. The Pro case brief includes:
Brief Facts:
A Synopsis of the Facts of the case.Rule of Law:
Identifies the Legal Principle the Court used in deciding the case.Facts:
What are the factual circumstances that gave rise to the civil or criminal case? What is the relationship of the Parties that are involved in the case.Issue(s):
Lists the Questions of Law that are raised by the Facts of the case.Holding:
Shares the Court's answer to the legal questions raised in the issue.Concurring / Dissenting Opinions:
Includes valuable concurring or dissenting opinions and their key points.Reasoning and Analysis:
Identifies the chain of argument(s) which led the judges to rule as they did.
- The Brief Prologue closes the case brief with important forward-looking discussion and includes:
Policy:
Identifies the Policy if any that has been established by the case.Court Direction:
Shares where the Court went from here for this case.