Students compete in moot court final round

2L Matthew Larson named competition champion

—By Lori Craig

After arguing against a special probation condition before three Court of Appeals judges, Matthew Larson was named the champion of the 59th annual Hale Moot Court Honors Competition.

Second-year USC Law students Larson, Matthew Bennett, Danielle Kudla and Wende Nichols-Julien presented oral arguments before the law school, family and friends gathered at Norris Cinema Theatre March 7. Nichols-Julien was named runner-up.

Dean Rasmussen, center, with the finalists: Larson, Kudla, Nichols-Julien and Bennett

The final round, the culmination of a competition that started in October with 40 2Ls, was judged by United States Appeals Court Judges Danny J. Boggs, Johnnie B. Rawlinson and Milan D. Smith, Jr.

Bennett and Kudla argued on behalf of the government and Larson and Nichols-Julien represented the petitioner in a fictional case that centered on the arrest and probation conditions of a woman convicted of shipping images of child pornography in interstate commerce using a computer.

Larson protested a probation condition that prevented his client from using a computer capable of accessing a network or the Internet unless approved by her probation officer.

“The sentence should be clear to the defendant at the time of the sentencing hearing,” Larson said. “This condition presents an overbroad deprivation of liberty.”

Speaking on behalf of his fellow judges, Boggs admired the quality of the competition.

“We were very impressed with the arguments from each of the four finalists,” Boggs said. The fictional case “was an interesting problem and each of us had to delve into our own backgrounds and research to deal with it.”

Hale Moot Court Honors Competition Champion BAR/BRI Award Matthew Larson Hale Moot Court Honors Competition Finalists Judge E. Avery Crary Award Matthew Bennett Danielle Kudla Matthew Larson Wende Nichols-Julien Best Brief Barger & Wolen Written Advocacy Award David Aghai Melissa Case Matt Larson Ryan McMonagle Runner-up Best Brief LexisNexis Written Advocacy Award Julie Crisp Amy Neilan

Before the arguments, Dean Robert K. Rasmussen and Michelle Keogh, chair of the program’s executive board and last year’s competition winner, acknowledged the months of study and perseverance needed to reach the final round.

“The effective skill of advocacy is the effective skill one needs to be an attorney: You need to know your case, you need to know your client’s needs and you need to know the law cold,” Rasmussen said.

The final round was dedicated to the memory of Justice Paul Boland ’66, who for years has mentored Moot Court participants as a quarterfinal-round judge. Boland served on the California Court of Appeal, where he supervised the Judicial Externship Program.

Victor Elias, a 3L who worked for Boland and argued before him in last year’s competition, offered a tribute to Boland in which he remembered the way the judge always seemed to make time for him.

“He asked me questions about my classes and professors, about my well-being, about my plans for the summer … despite all the briefs I saw piled on his desk, I always felt like I was his only concern,” Elias said.

Now in its 59th year, the Hale Moot Court Honors Program is fully student-run, administered by a board of third-year students who participated in the competition during their second year. Board members select the topics for argument, create the hypothetical case and help the participants prepare their written and oral arguments.

Bennett, left, and Kudla during the  Moot Court final found	Judges Smith, Boggs and Rawlinson