Students shine at Moot Court competition

Drew Anderson named champion

-By Lori Craig

At the conclusion of arguments the judges described as “outstanding,” “impressive” and “superb,” Drew Anderson was declared the winner of the 2010-11 Hale Moot Court Honors Competition.

Anderson and fellow second-year students Max Castro, Andrew Quinio and Anthony Chavez competed in the final round of competition before an audience of their peers, faculty, family and friends March 4 at the USC Eileen Norris Cinema Theater.

Drew Anderson

“One of the things that binds us together as a profession is … the ability to engage in rigorous, sustained, reasoned analysis, and there is nothing that puts to the test that essential ability more than a moot court round – especially a moot court final,” said Dean Robert K. Rasmussen at the start of the contest.

The finalists argued a fictitious case that presented two important issues regarding a plaintiff’s rights under the Commerce Clause and the First Amendment of the Constitution. The first issue was whether a state statute that prohibits the direct shipment of wine to residents except by “small” wineries violate the Commerce Clause even though it is facially nondiscriminatory and the 21st Amendment allows states to regulate the distribution of alcohol.

The second issue was whether a state statute that prohibits alcohol ads in student-run college newspapers improperly restricts protected commercial speech in violation of the First Amendment.

Anderson argued that the state statute banning wine shipments to residents by small wineries was invalid under the Commerce Clause. Throughout his 15 minutes of oral argument, Anderson skillfully answered questions from the judges: the Honorable W. Scott Bales, Arizona Supreme Court; the Hon. Marsha S. Berzon, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; and Sean K. Kennedy, Federal Public Defender for the Central District of California.

After announcing the champion, the judges reflected on the performances of all four finalists and offered some advice.

“The thing I saw that I really respected was the ability to stand up there and engage and take risks, even make occasional, thoughtful concessions, and really try to answer the questions and see where it leads you,” Kennedy said. “You were all tough and independent and strong and I was really impressed with how good you could be as students, and I thought sometimes I wish I could be that good in an argument. You really held your own and you’re an impressive group.”

Moot Court final round contestants Chavez Anderson, Castro and Quinio.

“You were all well-prepared, you were all excellent in presentation, and really did an absolutely superb job,” Berzon said.

The judges also named the competition award winners. Each of the four finalists receives the Judge E. Crary Award, while Anderson also receives the BAR/BRI Award, which covers some of the cost of a bar review course.

The best brief winners, who won the Fox Rothschild LLP Written Advocacy Award, were Rachel Shames, Michael Parente, Yipeng Li and Nicole King. Chavez and Amanda Murray were runners-up for best brief, earning the LexisNexis Written Advocacy Award.

Sheereen Javadizadeh received the Outstanding Service Award for a participant, and Jaysen Chung received the Outstanding Service Award for an executive board member.

The Hale Moot Court Honors Program is run by students under the direction of Rebecca Lonergan, associate director of legal writing and advocacy. Being entirely student-run, the program offers students a chance to work on a team to accomplish a project – something they will do often as lawyers, Dean Rasmussen says.

Judges Bales, Berzon and Kennedy

First-year students are chosen to participate in their second year by an executive board of 11 third-year students, who are alumni of the program, based on their outstanding performance in a written and oral advocacy competition. The 40 participants submit briefs and participate in practice rounds held by the board before giving two different oral arguments in the preliminary rounds, judged by distinguished members of the local bar. Sixteen participants advance to the quarterfinals and eight to the semifinals, both judged by distinguished members of the local, state and federal benches.

The Hale Moot Court Competition was established in the 1948-49 school year and was named for the retired dean of the School of Law, William Greene Hale. The program grew in prestige and eventually became one of USC Law’s honors programs.