2018 Competition Questions

 

QUESTION: What specific time cards will your bailiffs be using this year? 

ANSWER: The bailiff will hold up a sign for 10, 5, 3, 1 and STOP. Please review Article Six for oral argument rules, division of time etc.

____________________________________

QUESTION: The opinion by the Appellate Court references on page 9 says as follows:  "In order for a child to be adjudicated as dependent, the petitioner must demonstrate, by clear and convincing evidence, that the child has been abused, neglected, or abandoned, as defined under Cap. Rev. Stat. § 33-430.10(1)."

This statute is not one of the one's provided in the materials for us. I saw that the question was asked already, but the answer did not provide any clarity as to how we should treat this statute.

ANSWER: In reviewing the above question and the materials, there was an incorrect citation on page 9 of the Opinion. The corrected portion would read:  In order for a child to be adjudicated as dependent, the petitioner must demonstrate, by clear and convincing evidence, that the child has been abused, neglected, or abandoned, as defined under Cap. Rev. Stat. § 33-400.4.

An incorrect citation to Cap. Rev. Stat. § 33-430.10(1) appeared in the Opinion.  The correct citation should have been to Cap. Rev. Stat. § 33-400.4, which is contained in materials provided.  The edited Opinion has been posted. In reviewing the question, all of the information was within the materials, but the incorrect citation on page 9 may have led to some confusion. We apologize for the error. We hope this resolves the questions posed on this topic.

 ____________________________________

QUESTION: We are wondering about what type of support is expected for the arguments for or against the dependency petition? Because dependency actions are governed by only the state law and policy of Capitania. So we know we can use Chapter 33 that was provided. We also know that case law from other jurisdictions are not binding and typically are not used to show how the statute is applied in Capitania. Are we suppose to use other states dependency cased as case support for whether the court properly ruled in this particular dependency claim?

ANSWER: Capitania does have controlling statutes but no body of case law. Because this is an open research  moot court competition, teams are free to  use their research skills to formulate persuasive arguments using cases from any U.S. Jurisdiction that you may find persuasive, keeping in mind that cases cited from other jurisdictions are not controlling authority. Article Seven-Briefs Paragraphs 2 and 3 address preparation and citation requirements. Be creative and Good Luck!

 ____________________________________

QUESTION: For schools that have two competing teams, after the briefs have been submitted, are they allowed to practice for oral arguments together?

ANSWER: For clarification, a question was posed recently pertaining to assistance during the brief writing phase of the competition and an answer was provided in the context of brief writing. In the answer, it was stated that teams must maintain their autonomy in all facets of the competition and not work together in any fashion whether they are from the same or different Law Schools. That answer may have led to some confusion. The response applied to  all facets of brief composition, drafting and research. Once briefs are submitted, the following is the interpretation of the current rules for assistance:

Nothing in the current rules prohibits Teams from practicing for oral argument together. Who may provide assistance and to what extent assistance can be provided for in brief preparation is governed by Article 10 paragraph 1. 

Once briefs are submitted, teams can practice together or receive assistance from other sources. The only stipulation in the rules is in Article Ten paragraph 4 which states: “Any person who provides assistance to any team by mooting or otherwise advising the team during their preparation for the competition may not serve as an oral round judge during the competition.”

We hope that this clarifies and distinguishes the position on both brief preparation and oral argument assistance.

____________________________________

 QUESTION:  For schools that have two teams competing, are the two teams allowed to discuss the issues while writing their briefs?

The Rule states: 

Permissible assistance is limited to (a) discussion of the issues with the students and (b) oral comments on the drafts of the brief, addressing stylistic and grammatical concerns and legal analysis. Editing, writing or rewriting of any of the text of the brief by anyone other than the team members, however, is not permitted. 

In regards to (a) does that mean all four students can discuss the issues together?

ANSWER:

Article Three 1. states that a team must consist of two or three law students attending the same ABA-accredited law school…and 3. Team members must be identified, and their names must be submitted to CULS, prior to January 1, 2018.  Team members may not be substituted, except for good cause…

Article Ten limits assistance that a team may receive to faculty members or the team coach.

Therefore, a team is a two or three person entity from the same Law School. If a Law School fields two teams, the teams are separate entities and are not allowed to work together or discuss their preparation or share work product in any way.  This would put multi-team schools at a distinct advantage over single teams schools because the teams would potentially consist of more than the allotted 2 or 3 members prescribed in Article 3. Teams should maintain their autonomy in all facets of the competition and not work together in any fashion whether they are from the same or different Law Schools.

____________________________________

QUESTION: I just wanted to point out that February 7, 2018 is on a Wednesday.  Does this affect the brief due date?

  1. Briefs are due on or before Monday, February 7th at 11:59pm (eastern time).  Please refer to the rules for detailed information about brief formatting and submission/service procedures.  You will be required to email a PDF version of your brief, as well as mail a hard copy.  The hard copy of the brief must be postmarked by February 7th (this is a rule change from last year; the hard copy of the brief does not have to be received by the deadline, but rather, postmarked).  The PDF version of your brief must be emailed by the deadline.

ANSWER: Briefs are due on or before Wednesday, February 7th at 11:59pm (eastern time). 

____________________________________

QUESTION: The brief references a set of statutes that were not provided in the materials. Will those statutes be supplemented? 

ANSWER: The Capitania statutes are posted on the Moot Court Problem page/website, along with the opinion and certified question. If you have difficulty accessing the statutes or other materials, email mootcourt@law.capital.edu

_____________________________________

 

If you have any questions or need further explanation, please contact us at mootcourt@law.capital.edu.