for law class ... help me

HotBod, Inc., a Maine corporation, makes and sells Pump it Up!, a weight-gain and muscle-building supplement and has its principal place of business in the New England states (Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts and Connecticut). Ned Nerdy, a citizen of New York, sees an ad for Pump it Up! in WorkOut magazine and buys a container of it from a distributer in the northeastern United States. Within ten days of beginning to use Pump it Up!, Ned Nerdy suffers internal injuries causing him injuries that result in more than $250,000 in medical expenses.

Because of this occurrence, the New York State Assembly (New York’s legislative body) enacted (passed) a law prohibiting HotBod from advertising, marketing or selling Pump it Up! in New York. That law further prohibited HotBod and its distributer from accepting any orders placed by people in New York, and from shipping Pump it Up! to any person in New York, even if such persons are outside New York when placing the order or receiving the product.

1. Alleging that the injuries are caused by Pump it Up!, Ned Nerdy files a suit against HotBod in a New York state court. HotBod asks the court to dismiss the suit on the ground that it does not have personal jurisdiction over HotBod. How would the court decide this issue?

2. Had Ned Nerdy chosen to bring the lawsuit against HotBod in a federal district court in New York, on what basis would he be able to do so? What law would the federal court apply and why? Would the federal court’s decision be the same as New York’s and why?

3. During the course of the suit, HotBod files a motion for judgment on the pleadings. After the discovery process (relevant information and evidence that is demanded by, and must be provided to, other party) both Ned Nerdy and HotBod file motions for summary judgment. When, and for what purpose, are each of these motions made?

4. Assume Ned Nerdy’s case eventually proceeds to trial and that the jury found in favor of him. If HotBod appeals the case, asserting that the evidence presented at trial to support Ned Nerdy’s claim was such that no reasonable jury could have found for the plaintiff and that appellate court should reverse the trial court's finding. How would the appellate court likely decide?

5. HotBod brings a lawsuit against the State of New York, claiming that the New York State Assembly’s law prohibiting HotBod from advertising, marketing, selling or shipping its product inside New York, or to anyone who resides in New York, is unconstitutional. What is the State of New York likely to argue in defense of its new law?

6. Assume that instead of the New York law only prohibiting HotBod from doing business with anyone from New York, the law also prohibited all companies manufacturing a product that is ingested (consumed by the body) from advertising, selling or shipping its product to anyone from New York, regardless of whether they are in New York when purchasing or receiving that product. Would your analysis be any different from question five? Why, and in what way? - Is this your question? Add additional information