Moot Court Board News
Congratulations to Margaret Royar, Jenn Siewertson, Josh Porter, and Thomas Stevens for advancing to the semi-finals of the First-Year Oral Advocacy Competition. The semi-finals will begin on Thursday, April 1 at 4:00 in the Allen Courtroom. Professors Leslie Abramson, Cedric Powell, and Luke Milligan will judge. Everyone is invited to attend.
4:00 Margaret Royar (appellant) v. Jenn Siewertson (appellee)
4:45 Thomas Stevens (appellant) v. Josh Porter (appellee)
Sign-ups for the National Moot Court Team are in progress! Sign up on the Moot Court Board Room door by Monday, April 5, 2010.
Applicants must also submit a sample brief as a writing sample (which, can, but need not be the BLS brief); this is due to Prof. Marcosson by Monday, April 5th. This counts for 50% of the try-out score.
Try-outs will consist of a 15 minute oral argument based on the brief and will take place Wed., April 7th and Friday, April 9th. The oral argument counts for 50% of the try-out score. Four individuals will be selected to represent the School on two teams.
If you have any questions, please contact Prof. Marcosson, Barry Dunn, Marty Pohl, Duffy Trager, Ben Basil, or Michael Gray.
The Moot Court Board thanks everyone who participated in the First-Year Oral Advocacy Competition this year. Twenty-six students argued in the Competition's first round on Monday. Eight individuals advanced to the quarterfinals which will be held Wednesday, March 31. Terry Cushing (Assistant United States Attorney), Shane O'Bryan (Dinsmore & Shohl), and Rebekkah Rechter (Kentucky Supreme Court staff attorney) will judge the quarterfinals.
All students are invited to attend the remaining rounds of the competition. The quarterfinals begin Wednesday at 4:00, the semi-finals Thursday, April 1 at 4:00, and the finals on Friday, April 2 at 2:00. All rounds are held in the Allen Courtroom.
First-Year Oral Advocacy Competition Quarterfinals
Wednesday, March 31
4:00 Margaret Royar v. Earlene Whitaker
4:45 Todd Garland v. Jenn Siewertsen
5:45 Alex Davis v. Josh Porter
6:30 Sarah Potter v. Thomas Stevens
The Moot Court Board is proud to announce that the following individuals were elected officers for the 2010-11 academic year:
Marilyn Osborn, President
Brian Bennett, Vice President for Administration
Jennifer Monarch, Vice President for External Relations
Ben Basil, Vice President for Internal Affairs
Roz Cordini, Vice President for Public Relations
The Moot Court Board is responsible for organizing and administering all the Law School's moot court activities of the Law School. The school competed in eighteen external competitions during the 2009-10 academic year and held two internal competitions, Pirtle-Washer and the First-Year Oral Advocacy Competition.
The Moot Court program's 2009-10 success continued last weekend as our Patent Law team made the regional semi-finals of the Giles Sutherland Rich Memorial Moot Court Competition. The competition was held in Houston, Texas, at the Federal Courthouse for the Eastern District of Texas and marked the first time that UofL had competed in the competition. Eighteen teams participated.
Team member Dave Kincaid argued all issues by himself for the team after teammate Mari-Elise Gates, who was on brief with Kincaid, could not attend due to the Trademark Moot Court Competition finals. Kincaid was the only student at the competition forced to argue by himself.
Kincaid defeated three teams, including the University of Houston, Loyola (Los Angeles), and South Texas, before succumbing to the University of Tennessee in the semi-finals. Along the way, judges complemented Dave on his professional demeanor and presentation skills and particularly liked his ability to complete a running rebuttal when arguing as appellee.
The Patent Law team is coached by Professor John Cross. Special thanks goes to Dr. Bruce Stuckman, an alumnus of the law school, for his generous financial support.
The Chief Justice in the first round stated that Ashley and Ben were both “excellent,” “in command of their arguments,” “unflappable, and persuasive.” He thought Ben’s presentation exhibited an “enjoyability so rare in legal jurisprudence.” Other judges noted that Ashley had a “nice pace” and “unflappable look.” One judge emphasized that he had heard several Hoffman arguments (in real life) and that Ben’s was “the best presentation” he had heard.
In the second round, judges reported that Adrienne did an “excellent job,” that her “posture and composure” were “fantastic” and that her ability to use “little to no notes” was impressive. The judges noted that Ben had a “good tone,” “responded well to questions,” clearly answering with a “yes” or “no,” exhibited appropriate deference, and made very good transitions.
In the third round, the judges stated that Ashley and Ben exhibited “meticulous preparation and their knowledge of the facts and precedent were remarkable.” Ben gave “very good examples and “was very persuasive.” One judge commented that Ben was “right on top of the game.” Ashley had a good “conversational style,” and a steady, firm, committed presentation. She “stood her ground well.”