The Andrews Kurth Moot Court National Championship January 26-29, Competition Rules

Similar documents
TULANE UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL MOOT COURT BOARD, MARDI GRAS INVITATIONAL NATIONAL SPORTS LAW TOURNAMENT 2011 COMPETITION RULES

2018 Moot Court Rules & Regulations

MOOT COURT BOARD MARDI GRAS INVITATIONAL

Billings, Exum & Frye National Moot Court Competition at Elon University School of Law Spring Official Rules

2019 Moot Court Rules & Regulations

The Thirty-First Annual. Rules. Prepared By: Elizabeth Murad, Chair. Faculty Advisor: Professor Evelyn M. Tenenbaum

TOURO LAW CENTER S 1 st ANNUAL NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION: LAW AND RELIGION. April 10-11, COMPETITION RULES

EMORY CIVIL RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES MOOT COURT COMPETITION FALL 2018 COMPETITION RULES

National Health Law. Moot Court Competition OFFICIAL RULES

ALA MOOT COURT RULES FOR 2012

ALA MOOT COURT RULES. Only ABA-accredited law schools may enter the ALA Moot Court Competition.

FORTY-SEVENTH ANNUAL WILLIAM B. SPONG, JR. INVITATIONAL MOOT COURT TOURNAMENT WILLIAM & MARY LAW SCHOOL FEBRUARY

2017 JUDGE JOHN R. BROWN ADMIRALTY MOOT COURT COMPETITION

Rules for the Seventeenth Annual Whittier Law School National Juvenile Law Moot Court Competition February 8-9, 2013

Forty-Third Annual Irving R. Kaufman Memorial Securities Law Moot Court Competition Kaufman Editor Ben Klein

COMPETITION RULES THE HERBERT WECHSLER NATIONAL CRIMINAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

University Moot Court Selections (UMCS)

The Eighth Annual National Cultural Heritage Law Moot Court Competition. Competition Rules

SIR HARRY GIBBS CONSTITUTIONAL LAW MOOT

TULANE UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL SPORTS LAW SOCIETY 11TH ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL BASEBALL ARBITRATION COMPETITION (2018) OFFICIAL RULES

THE JEFFREY G. MILLER NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW MOOT COURT COMPETITION

ALSA Mooting Rules 1. COMPETITION NAME 2. DEFINITIONS 3. REGISTRATION 4. COMPETITION STRUCTURE 5. PRELIMINARY ROUNDS

FEBRUARY 17 TH 19 TH RULES & GUIDELINES. Organized By School of Law

OFFICIAL RULES TWENTY- SIXTH ANNUAL DUBERSTEIN BANKRUPTCY MOOT COURT COMPETITION

HNBA 21 ST Annual Uvaldo Herrera National Moot Court Competition

EIGHTEENTH ANNUAL THURGOOD A. MARSHALL MEMORIAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

THE JEFFREY G. MILLER NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW MOOT COURT COMPETITION

Paper Presentation Competition Rules

2018 THURGOOD MARSHALL MEMORIAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

IV NOVICE MOOT COURT COMPETITION ORGANIZED BY: COLLEGE OF LEGAL STUDIES, MOOT COURT ASSOCIATION

RULES AND REGULATIONS

International Finals

2 nd NALSAR Gurcharan Singh Tulsi. Memorial Criminal Law Moot Court. Competition, January 18-20, Rules

8 TH NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, TH -17 TH SEPTEMBER SCHOOL of LAW, CHRIST UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU OFFICIAL RULES

RULES. 1 st LAW COLLEGE DEHRADUN NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION AUGUST 2013

PRUDENTIA CONSCIENTIA INGENIUM OCCURSUS 2013

INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF SPACE LAW MANFRED LACHS SPACE LAW MOOT COURT COMPETITION

Price Media Law Moot Court Competition Rules

9 TH LAWASIA INTERNATIONAL MOOT COMPETITION INTERNATIONAL ROUNDS (2014) OFFICIAL RULES

UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO FACULTY OF LAW SPORTS & ENTERTAINMENT LAW SOCIETY 2014 HOCKEY ARBITRATION COMPETITION OF CANADA.

13 th LAWASIA International Moot

RULES AND REGULATIONS

Client Interview Competition Rules

JAIPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY

THE ADVOCACY DEPARTMENT AT THE UNIVERSITY OF DENVER STURM COLLEGE OF LAW PRESENTS THE ADVOCATES CUP. A Trial Advocacy Tournament For 1Ls, 2Ls and 3Ls

Kingston Area Secondary School Athletic Association (K.A.S.S.A.A.) VOLLEYBALL PLAYING REGULATIONS June 2011

19th INTERNATIONAL MARITIME LAW ARBITRATION MOOT JULY 2018

International Criminal Law Moot Court Competition, Organised by. Amity Law School, Centre-II Amity University Uttar Pradesh India

17th INTERNATIONAL MARITIME LAW ARBITRATION MOOT JULY 2016

Rules of the American Collegiate Moot Court Association As Revised in January, 2007

20th INTERNATIONAL MARITIME LAW ARBITRATION MOOT JULY 2019

1 st NATIONAL ANIMAL LAW MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2016 RULES OF PROCEDURE

THE CENTER FOR ADVOCACY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF DENVER STURM COLLEGE OF LAW PRESENTS THE ADVOCATES CUP. A Trial Advocacy Tournament For 1Ls, 2Ls and 3Ls

THE OFFICIAL RULES OF THE 2014 PHILIP C. JESSUP INTERNATIONAL LAW MOOT COURT COMPETITION

THE RULES WILLMS & SHIER ENVIRONMENTAL LAW MOOT OFFICIAL COMPETITION RULES 2015

BAILIFF INSTRUCTIONS

2017 CPR INTERNATIONAL MEDIATION COMPETITION RULES SUMMARY

THE DANIEL S. HOFFMAN MEMORIAL CUP


Rules of Procedure. International Criminal Court Moot Court Competition ICC Moot Court Competition 1

K.A.S.S.A.A Basketball Guidelines June 2010

AMITY LAW SCHOOL, DELHI RULES OF THE COMPETITION

INTRA INSTITUTE MOOT COMPETITION MOOT PROPOSITION

THE 2018 PHILIP C. JESSUP INTERNATIONAL LAW MOOT COURT COMPETITION

AMITY LAW SCHOOL, DELHI INTRA-TRIAL ADVOCACY COMPETITION INDUCTION ROUNDS

TRIAL COURT BAILLIFF S STUDY GUIDE

FIBA 3x3 National Team Regulations Edition 2017

APPE Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl (IEB) Regional Rules

USA World Schools Debate Invitational Manual Debate Rules/Procedures/Protocols

THE 2015 PHILIP C. JESSUP INTERNATIONAL LAW MOOT COURT COMPETITION

Carpinteria AYSO Beach Cup XX AYSO Invitational Tournament Rules

PART V FINA DIVING RULES

Table of Contents. Page 2

CYO West Contra Costa WCC/Northern League Basketball Rules

2016 AUSTRALIAN OLYMPIC TEAM WRESTLING AUSTRALIA INCORPORATED NOMINATION CRITERIA

2017 US Youth Soccer National Championship Tournament PA WEST SOCCER PRESIDENTS CUP TOURNAMENT MANAGEMENT

Strikers Jr. Cup 2017

2018 USTA and USTA SOUTHERN LEAGUE REGULATIONS

These Rules and Regulations, the US Youth Soccer President Cup Rules, and the Laws of the Game (FIFA) in that order shall govern the games.

Monday, November 12 (Practice Day) Tuesday, November 13 Friday, November 16, ENTRY CONDITIONS

Adult Volleyball Leagues 2018 Team Registration

RULES AND REGULATIONS

OFFICIAL RULES AND POLICIES Big Sioux Youth Basketball League, Inc. PO Box 101 Harrisburg, SD

USTA Missouri Valley USTA League Tennis 2014 Rules and Regulations 11/18/2013 (updated 12/7/2013)

NEGOTIATION COMPETITION

2017 ISSA Tournament Rules and Information 1. GAME RULES:

Durham Soccer League. Rights and Responsibilities

BRACKETING 3-TEAM BRACKETS:

Georgia Soccer State Cup Tournament Rules & Regulations

2016 AUSTRALIAN OLYMPIC TEAM

TOURNAMENT RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE 2018 Rainier Challenge

2018 PA WEST FUTSAL STATE CUP TOURNAMENT MANAGEMENT

MULS Client Interview Rules

2010 CSL Rights and Responsibilities CENTRAL SOCCER LEAGUE 2010 RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES

SOCCER BY-LAWS. 2. CLASSIFICATION Official competition shall be conducted in Girls Varsity and Junior Varsity, and Boys Varsity and Frosh/Soph.

2017 USTA and USTA SOUTHERN LEAGUE REGULATIONS

SOUTH TEXAS YOUTH SOCCER SPRING CUP MANUAL

The Leicester Law School Medical Law Mooting Competition Sponsored by 1 Crown Office Row

PALOS VERDES BASKETBALL ASSOCIATION

EASTERN PENNSYLVANIA YOUTH SOCCER PRESIDENTS CUP RULES AND REGULATIONS Part of the US Youth Soccer National Presidents Cup

Transcription:

The Andrews Kurth Moot Court National Championship January 26-29, 2011 2011 Competition Rules

The Andrews Kurth Moot Court National Championship is a competition designed to recognize a law school s sustained excellence in moot court. Participating schools qualify for the Championship through their performance in moot court competitions in the previous academic year. Rule 1 Teams 1.1 A team must consist of two or three law students attending the same ABA-approved law school. For the purposes of these rules, a law student enrolled during the semester or quarter of the Championship is eligible to participate. Only students who are candidates for a Juris Doctor degree may compete. 1.2 A team may designate one team member as the brief writer. 1.3 Each team entering the competition must submit a registration form and the entry fee to the University of Houston Law Center by October 30 th, 2010. If a school does not submit the registration form and entry fee by the deadline, the school may, at the discretion of the Championship Director, forfeit its right to participate in the tournament. 1.4 Team members may not be substituted, except for good cause, such as death, severe illness, or other uncontrollable circumstance. After the brief-filing deadline, a team must obtain the Championship Director s written approval to substitute a team member. No substitutions are allowed once the tournament begins. 1.5 Participating schools will receive a randomly assigned a number designation. This number will be the sole method of identifying the team throughout the tournament. Participants may not directly or indirectly divulge their law schools identity to the judges until after the scores have been calculated and the results have been announced. Rule 2 Briefs 2.1 Each team will be randomly assigned to write its brief on behalf of the petitioner or respondent. 2.2 Unless otherwise stated in these Rules, briefs will comply with the Rules of the Supreme Court of the United States. Supreme Court Rule 24.1(e), 24.2, 24.3 and 24.4 should not 1

be followed. Rule 33 should be followed only with regard to the preparation of the brief covers. 2.3 The cover of the brief must include the team's designation in the lower right corner. No information serving to identify the team or its law school, other than its designation supplied by the Championship Director, may be included on the cover or anywhere inside the brief. 2.4 All citations should conform to either the most recent edition of A Uniform System of Citation (commonly known as The Bluebook) or the most recent edition of ALWD Citation Manual: A Professional System of Citation. 2.5 Briefs produced by any printing or copying process shall be in 11-point non-proportional (Courier) print font and shall not exceed 35 pages. Any partially filled page will be counted as a full page. The page limit does not include pages containing the questions presented, table of contents, table of authorities, and the appendix. 2.6 The paper size for the brief must be 8 ½" x 11". 2.7 Each page of text shall contain no more than 28 lines of double-spaced text. Typed matter should not exceed 6 ½" x 9 ½" per page. The page number is not included in this measurement. 2.8 Typed matter must be double-spaced, except footnotes, argument headings, and extended quotations may be single-spaced. Footnotes, argument headings, and single spaced quotations must appear in the same size font as listed in subsection 5 of this Rule. Footnotes may not exceed 15 linear inches of text for the entire brief. 2.9 Each team submitting a brief shall certify that the brief was prepared and served in accordance with the Championship Rules (See Appendix 1). Teams shall submit the certification form, as a separate document, simultaneously with the brief. 2.10 A team may not amend or revise its brief once it has been submitted. 2.11 Service of Briefs a. Service of the brief will be by electronic submission on the Championship Director. Teams will submit their briefs in two formants: 1) as a Portable Document Format file (Adobe.pdf), and 2) as a Word file. Both files should be attached to an email sent to the Championship Director at the following address: mcnc@uh.edu. The deadline for submission is 11:59 PM, on Monday, December 6 th, 2010. b. The e-mail must contain only (1) the electronic copies of the submitted brief and (2) the certification form. The email must contain the team number in the email s subject line, and the law school s name in the body of the email. 2

c. The brief must be a single document. The document must not contain any portion of the appellate record (other than a portion contained in the brief s text), hypertext links to other material, or any document that is not included in the brief. d. A copy of each brief will be posted on the Championship website to allow all participating teams access. The briefs will be posted on the webiste no later than Monday, December 13 th, 2010. e. If a team fails to properly serve its brief under these rules, the service date will be considered the date the brief is received. 2.12 Brief Scoring a. Each brief will be evaluated by a member of the 5-member Scoring Committee. A 100-point scale will be used. b. Knowledge of the law and persuasiveness will be the primary standards in grading, but form and style will also be considered c. The high score and the low score will be dropped and the remaining three scores will be averaged in order to determine a team s brief score. d. Brief scores will be published to the coaches/faculty advisors during the coaches meeting at the beginning of the competition. The decision of whether to relay that information to a team rests with the coach/faculty advisor of that team. e. A copy of the brief scoring sheet is attached to these rules as Appendix 2. 2.13 Brief Penalties a. A three point penalty will be assessed (deducted from the team s final averaged brief score) for each twenty-four hour period, or part thereof, for late filing. b. A one point brief penalty will be assessed (deducted from the team s final averaged brief score) for each page, or part thereof, which exceeds the page limit of these rules. Any partially filled page shall be counted as a full page, including the last page and any other page with unused space. c. A one point brief penalty will be assessed (deducted from the team s final averaged brief score) for a team s failure to submit the certification form in accordance with these rules. d. Teams will be notified of any penalty deductions 14 days prior to the tournament. 2.14 Assistance 3

a. The brief is to be the work product of the Championship student team members only. b. Team members may not, during the brief writing process, discuss the problem with anyone. c. It is permissible for coaches and faculty advisors to help students set a brief writing schedule. d. Subsections 2.14 (a), (b), and (c) are the letter of this rule. The spirit of this rule is that the students who compete in the Championship have full and total responsibility for the brief. There are undoubtedly loopholes to this rule and to look for loopholes would, by the very nature of that action, violate the spirit of this rule. Rule 3 Oral Arguments 3.1 Each team will participate in four preliminary rounds. The first and third rounds will be on brief and the second and fourth rounds will be off brief. 3.2 Two team members will argue in each round of oral argument. A team may vary which members will argue from round to round. Only those team members who are arguing may sit at counsel table. 3.3. Oral argument is limited to a total of 30 minutes per team. a. Although a team may divide its time allotment as it chooses, no team may allocate more than 17 minutes to one advocate. b. The petitioner may reserve up to a maximum of three minutes for rebuttal. Only one advocate may argue rebuttal. c. The judges may, in their sole discretion, extend any speaker s time. 3.3 Oral arguments will be scored using a 100-point scale. A sample scoring sheet is attached as Appendix 3. 3.4 If a tie exists after the oral argument and brief scores are considered, the team winning the oral argument portion will be declared the winner of the round. In this situation, the margin of victory for the winning team will be zero and the margin of loss for the losing team will be zero. 3.5 Teams are not permitted to scout during the tournament. No team member, or person associated with a competing school, may attend the argument of any other school or receive information from any person who has attended an argument of any other school. 4

3.6 Pairings for the four preliminary rounds will be through random assignment. The pairings for all the preliminary rounds will be published 14 days in advance of the competition. 3.7 After completion of the four preliminary rounds, advancement to the quarter-final round will be determined using the following process: a. Win/loss record; b. Point differential; c. Higher brief score. 3.8 If a team forfeits an assigned round, the team s scheduled opponent will be the winner of that round. 3.9 The team s score in the preliminary rounds will be computed by weighing the oral argument 70% and the brief score 30%. 3.10 The team s score in the quarter-final and semi-final rounds will be computed by weighing the oral argument 80% and the brief score 20%. 3.11 The team s score in the final round will be computed by weighing the oral argument 90% and the brief score 10%. 3.12 The quarter-final rounds will pair #1 v. #8, #2 v. #7, #3 v. #6, and #4 v. #5. Petitioner/Respondent assignments for the quarter-final round will be determined by a coin flip with the lower ranking team making the heads/tails call. 3.13 Teams advancing to the semi-final and final round will change sides when possible. If it is not possible for both teams to change sides, then Petitioner/Respondent assignments for the final round will be determined by a coin flip. The lower ranked team will call heads/tails. Rule 4 Administration 4.1 A protest of any brief penalties must be made timely and in writing (electronic filing is permissible). The protest should be sent to the Championship Director at the following email address: mcnc@uh.edu 4.2 Any protest arising out of oral argument are considered waived unless the protest is brought to the attention of the Championship Director prior to the publishing of the results that relate to the subject of the protest. 4.3 The deadline for submitting questions and clarifications about the problem is Monday, November 8 th, 2010. Responses to questions will be distributed to all teams so that all competitors will have identical information. Submit questions to: mcnc@uh.edu 5

4.4 Submit questions and clarifications about the rules to: mcnc@uh.edu 4.5 The Championship Director, in consultation with the Championship Committee, shall interpret these rules. 4.6 The conduct of all participants in the competition, including team members, coaches, and bailiffs, will be governed by the standards set out in the ABA Model Code of Professional Responsibility and the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct and may result in disqualification. 6

Appendix 1 Certification Form We hereby certify that the brief of Team has been prepared and served in accordance with the Championship Rules. Team Member 1 (Printed Name) (Signature) Team Member 2 (Printed Name) (Signature) Team Member 3 (Printed Name) (Signature) 7

Appendix 2 FINAL BRIEF SCORE SCORING SHEET BRIEF NUMBER: NAME OF JUDGE: BRIEF PARTS POINTS: Possible Given 1. QUESTIONS PRESENTED................ (6) Are the questions posed to frame the exact issue to be decided, expressed in the terms and circumstances of the case, but without unnecessary detail or repetition? Are the questions phrased to call for a favorable answer without being argumentative? 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS................. (2) Are the parts in proper sequence for accurate identification and speedy location? Do points and sub-points provide an overall outline of the case? 3. TABLE OF AUTHORITIES............... (2) Are all of the authorities sensibly divided and arranged, with proper division between cases, constitutional materials, statutes, rules and secondary sources? 4. OPINIONS BELOW.................. (1) Are the opinions below properly included and referenced (to the extent the problem permits)? 5. CONSTITUTIONAL OR STATUTORY PROVISIONS...... (3) Are relevant constitution(s), statutes, rules, regulations or ordinances (which are directly involved and must be construed or applied to reach a decision) included in either (1) an edited version in this part or (2) listed in this part and stated in an appendix? 6. STATEMENT OF THE CASE............... (10) Are the facts, including the procedural facts and results, reasonably developed (with references to the record) and fairly stated (consistent with fairness and candor)? Are the facts stated, with order and emphasis, to persuasively tell that client's side of the case? 7. SUMMARY OR ARGUMENT................ (5) Are the summaries accurate and clear condensations, by suitable paragraphs, of the argument actually made in the body of the brief and not a mere repetition of the headings in the arguments? 8. ARGUMENT a. ISSUE RECOGNITION................ (10) Are all of the necessary issues included in the arguments? Are the issues confused or show a lack of understanding of what is involved? Are irrelevant issues included? b. ARGUMENT STRUCTURE............... (10) Are the arguments structured to indicate a recognition of the issues? Are the arguments organized in a clear manner and compel a conclusion in the writer's favor? c. ARGUMENTATIVE HEADINGS AND TONE......... (10) Are the points and sub-points clear and effective headings that serve as a succinct summary of the argument to follow? Are the arguments developed as announced in the points, headings and introductory materials? 8

d. AUTHORITY.................... (10) Are the best available legal authorities used? Are statutes, legislative history and secondary authorities appropriately developed and used (or overused)? Are all unfavorable authorities recognized and properly treated? e. PERSUASION................... (15) Are the issues and authorities combined with sound legal analysis for the most effective persuasion? Are the facts, analogies and public policies appropriately argued to apply the law? Are favorable arguments positively stressed and unfavorable arguments recognized and answered? 10. CONCLUSION..................... (2) Does the conclusion request the correct relief available under the record and arguments? 11. APPENDIX...................... (2) Has the correct decision been made to include an appendix or not? (Points may be given or not given for either decision.) If an appendix is used, are those items included in the appendix the proper type of items to be so included? 12. STYLE AND APPEARANCE................ (7) Is the brief clear and unambiguous, reflecting good word choice, readable sentence structure and careful editing? Does the brief look polished and present an overall professional appearance? Does the brief make the sale? 13. CITATION FORMAT............. (5) Do the citations in the brief conform to the style required under the rules? FINAL BRIEF SCORE (out of 100 points) 9

Appendix 3 JUDGE'S SCORING SHEET Petitioner: Team Counsel 1 Counsel 2 Name: Name: Max. (50) Evidence of Research; Knowledge of the Record, Issues and Law; Organization and Reasoning (20) Performance in Answering Questions (direct, correct & complete answers with poise) (10) Public Speaking Performance (including clarity of thought, voice, eye contact, gestures, absence of bad habits, etc.) (10) Persuasiveness of counsel, Irrespective of Merits (likeable, sincerity and conviction) (10) Counsel's Demeanor and Courtroom manner (10) Max. (50) (20) (10) (10) (100) Total (100) Respondent: Team Counsel 3 Counsel 4 Name: Name: Max. (50) Evidence of Research; Knowledge of the Record, Issues and Law; Organization and Reasoning (20) Performance in Answering Questions (direct, correct & complete answers with poise) (10) Public Speaking Performance (including clarity of thought, voice, eye contact, gestures, absence of bad habits, etc.) (10) Persuasiveness of counsel, Irrespective of Merits (likeable, sincerity and conviction) (10) Counsel's Demeanor and Courtroom manner (10) Max. (50) (20) (10) (10) (100) Total (100) Best Speaker: Signature 10