Monday, February 23, 1998
Law students face judgment day at Moot Court
LAW SCHOOL Aspiring lawyers present briefs, practice speaking
skills
By Emi Kojima
Daily Bruin Contributor
The courtroom was cold. Three black-robed judges sat in a row at
the bench with the U.S. flag to their right and the California
state flag to their left.
They scrutinized the lawyer who stood in front of them.
"Why was that ?" the judge in the middle interrupted the lawyer
in mid-speech.
She began to respond, but the judge interrupted her again, "Why
was that?"
This grilling of UCLA law students by formidable judges was part
of Saturday’s honors Moot Court competition held by students of the
UCLA Law School.
Students participated in the three-round competition in a
simulated appellate courtroom. Winners will be announced in about
two weeks.
After this first round, the two teams gave sighs of relief.
"It’s hard to know how you did," said Fred Wilks, a second-year
law student. "You get nervous."
"Your mouth goes dry," said his partner, Russell Wetanson, also
a second-year law student.
"And it’s cold," opponent Azadeh Allayce said.
They competed for their resumes, for experience and for fun.
"It’s a way to distinguish yourself as a law-school student,"
said Brian Barnes, a second-year law student.
These students are among the approximately 65 advocates who
argued in Saturday’s competition, after advancing from the fall
competition of about 120 people.
The Moot Court board had to round up about 70 judges to evaluate
their briefs and oral advocacy skills. Judges evaluate students on
their speaking skills and prepared briefs on a fictional case.
"It’s remarkable, sometimes, because they are better than real
lawyers," said Marc Hankin, a patent attorney who judged the
competition.
"Law students focus on the issues and are most highly interested
in the material," he said.
Many judges participated in Moot Court during their law school
years. Hankin is a self-proclaimed "Moot Court junkie."
Patent attorney Robert Allen, a UCLA Law School graduate,
remembered how he decided to become involved in the program on the
first day of law school.
"The guy from the Moot Court who spoke at my orientation was so
dynamic," he said. "I was so excited that I couldn’t wait to get
involved."
Allen has judged at the Moot Court competition every semester
for five years.
The case that law students argued pertains to a real issue in
law that is currently unresolved.
The Moot Court executive board makes up the case every year.
They argued the case of Sarah D. Baker, who filed a civil suit
against the hospital which fired her after she was pricked with a
needle of an HIV-positive patient and became infected with the
virus.
Students argued whether the plaintiff was qualified to perform
her job and if she had reasonable accommodations.
States throughout the nation have dealt with the issue of
whether health care workers who test HIV-positive should continue
their employment.
Students, however, said more about how the competition improved
their speaking skills than their knowledge of case law.
"Work on your demeanor," Moot Court Judge Wolpert suggested in
comments to an advocate after a round.
Many students reiterated that they learned about etiquette in
the courtroom.
"I learned not to be rude to judges," said Heather Moosnick,
second-year law student.
"It’s better to embarrass yourself in front of your peers than
to fall on your face in the real world," she said.
The best advocates from the series of Moot Court competitions,
including this one, will compete at the state and national level
during the next school year.
"Every year students make the same mistakes and learn from round
to round," Hankin said.
"Other law schools spend money hiring professional coaches and
offering academic credit. Because UCLA is a state school and
competitive academically, students are not as well trained as at
other schools," he said.
"This year UCLA came in second overall (at the Western Regional
competitions). That truly attests to the fact that the students are
doing a good job," he said.