Finalists face off in Moot Court competition March 4
-Story and photos by Lori Craig
When four USC Law students stand before a panel of esteemed judges on March 4, it will be the culmination of nearly eight months spent examining, researching, writing and arguing.
Second-year students Drew Anderson, Max Castro, Anthony Chavez and Andrew Quinio are the finalists of the 2010-11 Hale Moot Court Honors Program, which commenced with the fall semester. They will present their oral arguments at 2 p.m. in the Norris Theater to the Honorable Marsha Siegel Berzon, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, the Hon. W. Scott Bales, Arizona State Supreme Court, and the Hon. Sean Kennedy, federal public defender for the Central District of California.
 |
| A preliminary round of the Hale Moot Court Honors Program, held in Ackerman Courtroom |
“The purpose of the Hale Moot Court Honors Program is to teach oral advocacy skills and give participants some real, front-line experience in testing their abilities,” said Brandon Reilly ’11, chair of the program’s executive board, which is made up of past participants. “I think the heart and soul of the program is that we are all competitive people, and it facilitates the thrill that we all get from being presented with a challenge, working hard, and then just utterly dominating that challenge.”
The finalists were named following two semi-final rounds of competition held in February. They are the last four standing of 40 2Ls selected for the entirely student-run honors program based on outstanding oral and written advocacy in a first-year qualifying competition.
Working from a fictitious case written by members of the executive board, each participant submits a written brief and participates in two practice rounds of oral arguments in which they must argue both sides of the issues of the case.
“Those are always kind of scary, but it’s the best way to practice before your actual preliminary round,” said Jaysen Chung ’12, advocacy vice chair. “But I don’t think anything really prepares you for the first time the judges walk out of the chambers in Ackerman Courtroom and everyone stands up and the gavel bangs.”
Danielle Perkel ’11 agrees it is difficult to fully be prepared for your 15 minutes at the podium.
“Standing in front of the judges is a terrifying and exhilarating experience,” said Perkel, a semifinalist. “I almost spilled water all over the table because my hands were trembling. Despite the anxiety, it is exciting watching your argument develop in front of the judges.
“One of the most valuable tools I have learned from Moot Court has been to think on my toes and to act confident even when my hands are trembling.”
 |
| Andrew Quinio '12 argues before the judges. |
Preliminary rounds of the competition are judged by distinguished members of the local bar, many of whom are USC Law and Hale Moot Court alumni. Sixteen participants are selected to move on to the quarter-final competition, then eight continue to the semifinals. Later rounds are judged by distinguished members of the local, state and federal benches, with Dean Robert K. Rasmussen joining the bench for the semifinals.
Along the way, participants are mentored by the executive board, who walked in their shoes just last year. Participants meet with at least two of the board’s six editors before submitting their brief, and attend two seminars organized by board members: an issue seminar that features presentations by two USC Law professors, and an oral advocacy seminar.
“The board members are always willing to practice or offer guidance in preparation for a round,” Perkel said.
Board members also select the topics for argument, prepare the record and the bench brief, and invite the judges for each round. Advising on all of this is Professor Rebecca Lonergan, associate director of legal writing and advocacy and adjunct professor.
Although the competition is set up as an appellate advocacy, many of the skills learned are basic to any kind of advocacy in the legal profession.
“In any aspect of the law you’re going to have to speak persuasively and speak succinctly and articulately – whether you’re in court or doing a deal on the phone,” Chung said. “It gives everybody a lot of practice to do so in an uncomfortable situation.”
Perkel, who hopes to do appellate work and focus in litigation, thinks her Moot Court experience will benefit her in whatever field or occupation she chooses.
 |
| Howard Kroll '81, David Eisen '81 and Janine Jeffery '83 judge a preliminary moot court round. |
“It’s been exciting finally doing what I had always believed lawyers actually did,” Perkel said. “I now have the confidence to take on any challenge, even if it is outside my comfort zone.”
This year’s final round of competition is shaping up to be an exciting one, thanks to the exceptional quality of all the participants.
“It’s a testament to the program” and a reflection of how dedicated the board was to preparing the participants, said Megan Braziel ’11.
“I like to think that everyone experiences success during the competition, even those who don’t advance,” said Reilly. “Do you get nervous before an oral argument? Sure. But it’s a rush. The board members and even the alumni judges know that because we’ve experienced it ourselves, and it makes for a pretty cool fraternity.”
The Hale Moot Court Honors Program was established in the 1948-49 school year and named for the retired dean of the law school, William Greene Hale.
Previous Article
