fdmcc

2002?2003 RULES OF THE
FREDERICK DOUGLASS MOOT COURT COMPETITION

[Cite as: 2002-2003 FDMCC Rules *]

Article I ? Purpose

The General Convention of NBLSA unanimously approved a resolution to conduct an annual National Moot Court Competition. As a result, the Frederick Douglass Moot Court Competition was established. The purpose of the Frederick Douglass Moot Court Competition is to expose all participants to as realistic an appellate advocacy experience as can be practicably attained. The Frederick Douglass Moot Court Competition promotes and improves professional legal development by simulating the appellate advocacy experience through the preparation of a written brief and the presentation of an oral argument before a panel of judges.

Article II ?? General Administration

A. Overall Administration

The Frederick Douglass Moot Court Competition is administered under the auspices of the NBLSA National Vice Chair in coordination with the six (6) Regional Vice Chairs. The National Vice Chair shall appoint a National Moot Court Specialist and a National Moot Court Review Board to assist him/her in administration of the competition. The National Vice Chair of NBLSA is responsible for the National rounds, and together with the National Moot Court Specialist and the Regional Vice Chairs, is responsible for the direct administration of the competition at the Regional level. The ultimate responsibility and fiduciary duty, however, lies in the office of the National Vice Chair.

B. Composition of The National Moot Court Review Board ("NMCRB")

The NMCRB must be comprised of not more than seven (7) but no less than three (3) attorneys in practice, the judiciary and/or academia, not including the National Vice Chair and National Moot Court Specialist. At least one attorney must be currently in practice. The NMCRB shall review the Frederick Douglass Moot Court Competition problem through its developmental stages and provide the National Vice Chair with detailed written commentary for his/her use and incorporation. The names of the NMCRB members shall be published in a medium readily accessible to the general body of NBLSA. The NMCRB members shall at no time advise, coach, or comment on the problem with any person nor comment on the problem to anyone outside of the NMCRB.

Article III ?? National Vice Chair

Each year during the NBLSA General Convention, a law student shall be elected who shall serve as the National Vice Chair of NBLSA. This student shall have the responsibility for coordinating the following year's competition. The National Vice Chair is responsible for keeping the National Executive Board and the six (6) Regional Vice Chairs informed as to the progress of the competition. The National Vice Chair shall also be responsible for answering all questions and responding to all requests for rule interpretations of a substantive nature regarding his/her year's competition. The National Vice Chair acts in a similar capacity to a Regional Vice Chair for the National competition.
Article IV � General Eligibility Requirements

Teams from law schools with active NBLSA chapters may participate in FDMCC. All teams must fulfill ALL of the following eligibility requirements:

1. Teams must pay all Regional and National BLSA dues.

2. Each member of the team must be in good standing at their law school and must provide a written letter of good standing from the Dean of their school.

3. Each member of a team must submit a letter of good standing from their BLSA Chapter President indicating that each member is in good standing and that each member has participated in at least one community service activity.

4. Teams must complete and sign the Frederick Douglass Moot Court Certification and Entry Form.

5. Each Team must submit five (5) copies of their Brief to the National Vice Chair and five (5) copies of their Brief to their Regional Vice Chair by the December 13, 2002 deadline.

6. Teams must pay a $100 Entry Fee and submit the fee, Brief, Entry Form, and Letters of Good Standing from the Dean and BLSA Chapter President by the postmark deadline of December 13, 2002.

Article v - Organization Of the National and Regional Competitions

The top three winning teams of each of the six (6) Regional Competitions advance to the National Competition . The Regional competitions shall be held between January and February of year, at the discretion of the host region. Each Regional Vice Chair along with the Regional executive board is responsible for:

i. providing participants in its region with the schedule for the Regional competition,
ii. acquiring a sufficient number of judges for the competition, as well as acquiring a sufficient number of brief judges, and
iii. planning and coordinating all other aspects of the Regional competition, including the transition of the Regional teams to the National level of competition.

The precise number of days that a Regional competition will last depends on the number of teams assigned to the region. The top three winning teams of each of the six (6) Regional Competitions shall be eligible to advance to the National finals, which are held in conjunction with the NBLSA General Convention in March.

ARTICLE VI ?? INFORMATION

Requests for general information about the Regional Competitions should be directed to the respective Regional Vice Chairs. Questions regarding the National Competition, the substantive matters of the problem or interpretation of these rules should be directed to the National Vice Chair and must be in writing. The National Vice Chair will issue a written response. All teams will be notified of the question and the response through a readily accessible medium. (e.g. mailed copy, phone, Internet posting, etc.) Any method of publishing that would consume an inordinate amount of time (e.g. more than seven business days from receipt) in reaching the competitors is deemed an unacceptable mode of communication at any level.

NOTE: NEITHER REGIONAL NOR NATIONAL OFFICERS ARE AUTHORIZED TO ANSWER QUESTIONS OF A SUBSTANTIVE NATURE REGARDING THE PROBLEM OR N14KE AN INTERPRETATION OF THESE RULES, UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE HEREIN.

ARTICLE VII � participation rules

A. Rules Pertaining to Teams

1. Dues:

In order to be eligible to compete, the Chapter, Regional, and National Dues of the team's chapter must be paid.

2. Registration

a. Team Member Registration Required: Each member of the team must register and remit all fees, for the Regional Convention and, if any team qualifies for the National Competition each member must register for the National Convention. The entry fees for the FDMCC are separate and distinct from any fees for national and regional conventions.

b. Entry Materials and Fee: Each team entering the competition must send the entry materials as listed above in Article IV to the National Vice Chair. For all materials postmarked on or before December 13, 2002, the entry fee is $100.00. For all materials postmarked after December 13, 2002, but before December 17, 2002, the fee is $100.00 plus a $25.00 per day late fee. No entries postmarked after December 17, 2002 will be accepted.   Also, as stated above in Article IV, each team must submit five (5) copies of their Brief to their Regional Vice Chair by the deadline.

c. The entry form and entry fee must be sent to the National Vice Chair. The National Vice Chair must serve the respective Regional Vice Chairs with a Certificate of Registration for each eligible Team within seven (7) calendar days of the late filing deadline.

d. Contact Information: On the entry form, each team must designate a contact person to whom all official correspondence will be sent by the National Vice Chair and the Regional Vice Chair. A United States Postal Service ("USPS") and an electronic ("e?mail") mailing address must be provided for the contact person. A daytime and evening phone number must be included. If the contact person has a different phone number while school is not in session, that number must also be included. The contact person may be the team coach or a member. If the contact person changes his or her address or is replaced, the National Vice Chair and Regional Vice? Chair must be notified within twenty? four (24) hours. Any information, questions, or concerns discussed with this person is be deemed to have been communicated to the team.

e. Regional Registration Rules: Each team must ensure that it is abiding by any Regional rules for registration not contained herein. These rules are limited to registration of a delegate from your school for your moot court team to participate in the competition; and evidence that the team's chapter and members participated in community service activities. Any Regional rules that are contrary to the rules contained and referenced herein are void. See Article II, Section A as to interpretation of these and any other rule pertaining to the Frederick Douglas Moot Court Competition.

3. Team Composition

a. Number of Team Members: Each team must consist of two members who are enrolled at the same law school, unless extenuating circumstances exist and the National Vice Chair approves the addition of other members after the team submits a written request. See Article XVIII, Section A.

b. Substitution of Team Members: No substitutions of team members after registration may be made except in exigent circumstances subject to the written approval of the National Vice? Chair. Failure to obtain approval for the National Vice Chair to substitute team members will result in automatic disqualification and fee forfeiture. See Article XVII, Section A

c. Community Service Requirement: In order to be eligible to compete, Competitors must have participated in at least one (1) National, Regional, or Chapter community service project.

d. Outside Assistance: Each team must write their own brief and present oral arguments without any outside assistance, as that term is defined under Article VII, Section A (3)(d)(i) herein. At the competition, each team must be prepared to argue orally on behalf of petitioner and respondent.

i. The term "outside assistance" means that no team or individual team member may receive any assistance in writing its brief or preparing its oral argument. This definition shall not prevent the faculty, administration, other students, or attorneys from serving as a team coach, as that term is defined under Article VII, Section A (3)(d)(ii) herein. Further, this definition shall not prevent any team member from having another person proof read their brief.

ii. A "team coach" may participate with team members in preliminary general discussions of the problem, issues presented, judging practice oral arguments, providing general critiques and general decision?making as to strategy.

B. Rules Pertaining to Individual Competitors

1. Academic Standing:

In order to be eligible to compete, competitors must be enrolled in law school (or a joint law degree program) during the entire academic year in which they compete. Competitors must also be in good academic standing at the law school they attend during the entire academic year in which they compete. A letter of good academic standing, from your law school, must be sent to the National Vice Chair prior to arriving at the Regional and/or National competition

2. Law Degrees:

Competitors may not hold a juris doctor degree in any country.

3. Members of NBLSA National & Regional Boards:

In order to be eligible to compete, competitors may not be board members, staff, committee, and sub-committee members of any National or Regional BLSA Board or Moot Court Committee.

4. Applicability of School Honor Code:

Each team member is bound by his/her school's honor code (or its equivalent) and must not receive any outside assistance as described supra. The Regional or National Vice Chair has the discretion to disqualify any team or individual team member for any violation of such code.

5. Brief Certification:

Each team member is required to certify that his/her team's brief is solely the result of the named team members' efforts, the team members did not receive faculty or other outside assistance contrary to any rule, stated or referenced herein, each member complied with his/her school's honor code (or its equivalent), and that each team member understands these rules. In accordance with this rule each team member must remit the National Black Law Students' Association's Frederick Douglass Moot Court Competition Certification Form attached, with the team brief. See Appendix?A, infra.

C. Rules Pertaining to Law Schools ? Intra?School Competitions

1. Current Year's FDMCC Materials

Participating law schools may only use the current (i.e. in use by the NBLSA) Frederick Douglass Moot Court Competition problem, rules or related materials in an intra?school competition for preparing the current year's FDMCC Competitors and/or team selection.
2. FDMCC Materials from Prior Years

Participating law schools may, with the expressed written consent of the National Vice Chair, use a, Frederick Douglass Moot Court Competition problem, rules or related materials from any year other than the current school term in an intra?school competition. The participating law school must comport with the rules as set forth by the acting National Vice Chair with regard to publication and the like.

3. Right of Revocation

The National Black Law Students Association reserves the right to revoke the privilege of using the Frederick Douglass Moot Court Competition problem, rules or related materials for any reason or no reason at all.

ARTICLE VIII ? TIME TABLE

August ?October:

The transcript of the record shall be made available on www.nblsa.org no later than September 20, 2002. The Rules and Registration Materials will be available online through the NBLSA web page. If a hard copy is needed, please send a request to the National Vice Chair and a copy will be sent by United States Postal certified mail.

November:

All NBLSA Chapters will be notified as to the location of the Regional Competition.

December:

Entry forms, fees and briefs must be postmarked no later than December 13, 2002. Entries postmarked between December 14, 2002 and December 17, 2002 will be accepted and accessed a 5?point penalty per day and a $25 per day late fee. No entries will be accepted postmarked after December 17, 2002. Any entries received after this date will be returned via regular mail. Each team shall file five (5) copies of its brief with the National Vice Chair and five (5) copies with the Regional Vice Chair (1 copy for the Vice Chair's Manual, 3 copies for grading, and 1 copy for the permanent file).

Regional Vice Chairs will notify the contact person of each team assigned to their Region of all relevant information concerning the Regional Competition including the exact schedule, hotel accommodations, directions, procedures, etc. The National Vice Chair will distribute the requisite number of sealed judges' packets to the Regional Vice Chairs, which will include a cover letter, the transcript of the record, a bench memorandum, judges' instructions, bailiffs' instructions, and any other information to assist the Regional Vice Chair in conducting the Regional Competitions.

January ? February:

Regional Competitions will be held at the designated site with the exact dates of each Region's competition to be determined by the respective region. Once a date has been set, date changes are NOT recommended. If a date change is unavoidable, the Regional Vice Chair must notify the teams in its region immediately, allowing as much time as feasibly possible for the teams to rearrange their plans.

March:

The National Competition will be held March 12-16, 2003 in Los Angeles, CA., in conjunction with the 2003 NBLSA General Convention.

ARTICLE IX ?? REGIONAL AND NATIONAL COMPETITIONS

Unless otherwise specified herein, the following rules apply to both the Regional and National competitions.

A. Competition Round(s) Logistics

1. Location of Rounds

All rounds of the Regional Competition shall be held at the Regional Conventions. The preliminary, semifinal, and final rounds of the National Competition shall be held at the NBLSA National Convention. All teams will argue twice except those earning a bye, as described below. No two teams from the same school will argue against each other in preliminary rounds. If two teams from the same school are drawn, the second team drawn will be replaced in the lot after another team has been drawn.

2. Team Identification:

Each team will be assigned a random letter ("Team Identification Letter ___�) by the Regional Vice Chair prior to its arrival at the competition. See Article XIII (A)(2)(a), infra. The names of the team members' schools MUST NOT BE DIVULGED TO THE JUDGES UNTIL AFTER THE FINAL ROUND. If a team member is asked what school the team member represents, the student should respond that the rules do not permit the divulging of that information until after the competition. ANY TEAM MEMBER THAT IDENTIFIES OR CAUSES TO BE IDENTIFIED ANY OF ITS SCHOOL, SOCIAL, CIVIC, OR RELIGIOUS AFFILIATIONS THROUGH THE USE OF APPAREL, JEWELRY, HAND GESTURES, OR MATERIALS BROUGHT INTO THE COURTROOM SHALL BE SUBJECT TO IMMEDIATE DISQUALIFICATION AND FEE FORFEITURE.

3. Designation of Side That Teams Will Argue:

The side that a team will argue in the first and second preliminary rounds of the competition, will be determined by the Regional Vice Chair through random drawing. The random drawing will occur when the exact number of teams for the competition has been determined and the teams have been identified. During the first and second preliminary rounds, each team should be prepared to argue on?brief and off?brief. The Regional Vice Chair will assure that no two teams from the same school argue against each other in the preliminary rounds. Alternatively, side designations may be made by the toss of a coin, as outlined below, once the pairings for the round have been determined. Occasionally, teams notify the Regional Vice Chair of their intention not to participate after the pairings have been established but before the competition has begun. The Regional Vice Chair will make the necessary changes in preliminary round pairings and notify the affected teams of the changes as soon as possible. Teams that withdraw from the competition must notify the Regional Vice Chair at the earliest possible date.

4. Bye Situations:

In the event that there are an odd number of teams at the start of the first preliminary round (for any reason) of the competition, two teams will be drawn at random from the entire registered lot. The first team drawn (Hypothetical Team A) will not argue in the first preliminary round. The second team drawn (Hypothetical Team B) will not argue in the second preliminary round. At the end of the second preliminary round the two (2) teams originally drawn at random (i.e. Hypothetical Team A vs. Team 13) will argue against each other. This method ensures that an all teams will receive two (2) preliminary round scores to base advancement past post?preliminary rounds.

5. Failure to Appear:

In the event that a team fails to appear on time for the first preliminary round argument, that team will be disqualified from the competition unless, in the discretion of the applicable Vice Chair, (i.e. Regional Vice Chair has discretion, upon consultation with the National Vice Chair) the reason for the team's failure to appear on time was totally beyond the team's control and ability to anticipate. If the late team is allowed to participate and arrives at a time that permits the first preliminary round scheduled to begin late without schedule disruption, the round may be so held.

6. Number of Judges Per Argument:

There will be three judges per argument (whenever possible). A lesser number is allowed, at the discretion of the Regional or National Vice Chair, as circumstances require. More than a three?judge panel is allowed, but the number must be odd. (e.g. five, seven ...) If a judge fails to appear for their scheduled arguments, then the National or Regional Vice Chair may substitute law professors for the judges if they are available. It is strenuously recommended that law professors do not sit for arguments involving schools with which they are affiliated. Neither coaches nor students, including LLM candidates, may judge any brief or oral argument at any level.

7. Changed Circumstances:

In the event of circumstances that directly affect the advancement of any Moot Court team member(s), the Vice Chair is required to give reasonable notice to the team members (or coaches) of the teams directly affected.

8. Power?Seeding in the Post?Preliminary Rounds

When teams advance to post?preliminary rounds power seeding occurs. (i.e. seeding will be on the basis of the highest combined scores after the preliminary rounds.) The highest scoring seeded team should be power? seeded against the lowest scoring seeded team, the second highest scoring seeded team against the second lowest scoring team, etc. Whenever possible, the Regional Vice Chair must ensure that two teams from the same school will not meet before the semifinal round.

a. Swapping Teams: Teams must be swapped to prevent a round involving two (2) teams from the same school will not meet before the semifinal round. When swapping teams, try to get the joint seeding number to equal as close as possible.

i) For example (only) in a quarter final round with 8 teams, get as close to nine (9) as possible ? 1 vs. 8 = 9 joint? seeding points, 2 vs. 7 = 9 joint? seeding points, 3 vs. 6 = 9 joint? seeding points, etc.; if a conflict exists, the following is an example of the proper method of switching that is to be used at all levels of competition: I vs.7 = 8 joint?seeding points, 2 vs. 8 = 10 joint?seeding points, 3 vs. 6 = 9 joint seeding points, etc. There is a more expansive example attached as Appendix F below.

B. Rules Specific to the Regional Competitions

1. Rounds of Competition

The Regional Convention shall include the preliminary, quarterfinal, semifinal and final rounds of the Regional Competition. The preliminary rounds shall include all teams, which have submitted briefs, each team must prepare to argue "on??brief' and "off? brief," as picked by lot. Team members forfeit any right they may have to their briefs, oral arguments or derivative work thereof Teams are not entitled to copies of score sheets associated with the briefs, oral rounds or any other aspect of the FDMCC, as those sheets contain judges' personal information.

2. Potential Octofinal Round

In the event that a Regional Competition has more than twenty? five (25) teams registered for the competition, there shall be an octofinal round. This round shall include the top sixteen (16) scoring teams advancing from the preliminary rounds of the Regional Competition. Each team shall argue once, on sides ? determined by lot.

3. Quarterfinal Round

The Regional quarterfinal round shall include the top scoring eight (8) teams from the Regional preliminary rounds. Each team shall argue once on sides determined by toss of a coin.

4. Potential Elimination of Quarterfinal Round

In the event that a Regional Competition has sixteen (16) teams or less registered for the competition, there may be no quarterfinal round; rather, the top four (4) teams may advance directly to the semifinal round. Where there are 16 teams or less, the National Vice Chair and the Regional Vice Chair will make the determination as to whether there will be a quarterfinal round before the competition.

5. Semifinal Round

The Regional semifinal round shall include the top four (4) teams from the Regional quarterfinal round. Each team shall argue once on sides determined by toss of a coin. The team that outscores its opponent advances to the next round; in other words, the finalists are determined by elimination.

6. Final Round

The Regional final round shall include the two (2) teams that won their respective argument at the Regional semifinal level based on the highest combined score and not the merits of the case. The finalists shall argue once against each other on sides determined by toss of a coin. The winner of the final round will be the team that outscores its opponent.

7. Teams Qualifying to Compete at the National Competition

The winner, first runner up, and second runner up teams of each region shall be eligible to compete at the National competition. Therefore, the National competition will be composed of eighteen (18) teams representing the six (6) different regions of the NBLSA. Nothing shall restrict a law school from sending two or more teams to the National competition should those teams qualify.

8. Substituting for Teams Qualified to Compete at the National Competition

If a qualifying team withdraws from the National competition, the team next in line at the Regional competition, based on cumulative scores, will be invited to compete. This team must decide whether or not to compete within five (5) days of notification. If a nationally qualified team withdraws within fourteen (14) days prior to the opening of the National Convention then no team may be substituted. This rule is not affected and the National Vice Chair is not responsible if your Region�s Convention/Competition is within the fourteen (14) day blackout period for substitutions. Regional Vice Chairs should indicate that no substitutions for nationally qualified teams will be allowed because of this rule and the timing of the Convention/Competition. However, a failure to give adequate notice does affect this or any other rule contained herein.

9. Participation Requirement

Teams that have registered for a given Regional competition but do not actually participate shall not be included for the purpose of calculating the number of teams that participate in a given Regional competition. Submission of a brief alone does not fulfill the participation requirement. Participation includes, but is not limited to, submitting a brief, appearing at the Regional competition and competing in oral arguments.

C. Rules Specific to the National Competitions

1. National Competition Roster & Preliminary Rounds

The National preliminary rounds shall include eighteen (18) teams comprised of the top three (3) teams from each Regional final round. Each team must prepare to argue "on?brief 'and "off?brief," as determined by ? lot. Teams agree that some, all, or none of the rounds at the National competition may be videotaped by NBLSA for the exclusive benefit of the Association and any other educational use as determined by the National Vice Chair.

2. Elimination of National Quarterfinal Round

In the event that less than twelve (12) teams compete in the National preliminary rounds, the quarterfinal round may be eliminated at the discretion of the National Vice Chair.

3. National Quarterfinal Round

The National quarterfinal round shall include the eight (8) teams with the highest combined score from the National preliminary rounds. Each team shall argue once on sides, which are determined by toss of a coin.

4. National Semifinal Round

The National semifinal round shall include the four (4) teams with the highest combined score from the National quarterfinal round. Each team shall argue once on sides, which are determined by toss of a coin.

5. National Final Round

The National final round shall include the two (2) teams with the highest combined score from the National semi-final round. The finalists shall argue once against each other on sides determined by the toss of a coin. The two (2) teams, which scored higher than their opponent, will advance to final round. In other words, the finalists will be determined by elimination. The team with the highest score in the National final round shall be declared the "FDMCC National Champions" for 2002? 2003. See generally Article XIV, infra.

ARTICLE X ? SCORING
A. Score Weighting

1. Preliminary & Octofinal Rounds: Briefs =Oral Arguments =Total Team Score: 50%50%100%
2. Quarterfinal Round: Briefs =Oral Arguments =Total Team Score: 30%70%100%
3. Semifinal Round: Briefs=Oral Arguments =Total Team Score: 20%80%100%
4. Final Round: Briefs =Oral Arguments =Total Team Score: 10%90%100%

B. Brief Judges

The National and Regional Vice Chairs will select a panel of brief judges for their respective competitions. The Regional Vice Chairs will submit a list, no later than 2 weeks before any brief is judged and graded, of the Regional brief judges to be approved, in writing, by the National Vice Chair. The Regional brief judges list should include, without limitation, the judge's name, title and/or position, phone number, USPS address and e?mail address (if available). Members of the panel will be chosen from the ranks of appellate judges, appellate practitioners and academicians. When such selection is impossible, trial level judges, practitioners, and academicians may be substituted; however, they must be reminded that FDMCC wishes to focus on giving the most points to those competitors who excel in appellate?style writing and oral argument. Each brief judge will be provided with a copy of the Rules of the Competition, the Record on Appeal, the bench memorandum, and evaluation forms. Each brief judge will evaluate all briefs served for his/her region or for the Nationals.

NOTE: AT NO TIME SHALL ANY LAW STUDENT, INCLUDING LLM CANDIDATES, BE ALLOWED TO GRADE BRIEFS. IF THIS RULE IS VIOLATED THE REGIONAL OR NATIONAL VICE CHAIR MUST TOSS OUT THE BRIEF SCORE AND CAUSE THE BRIEF TO BE RE?GRADED, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS RULE, IN THE MOST EXPEDIENT MANNER POSSIBLE. THIS RULE IS FINAL AND IS NOT SUBJECT TO ANY INTERPRETATION OR ADAPTATION.

C. Brief Scoring

Brief evaluation will be based upon the possible score of 100 points. The judges will base their decisions upon objective criteria intended to give importance to the more difficult and critical areas of the brief. See generally Article XIII, infra; Appendix?C

D. Oral Argument Scoring

The scoring of oral arguments will be based upon the maximum possible score of 50 points per oralist, combined with the team Brief Score for a team total of 100 points. The judges will be given a list of criteria ("Guidelines For Oral Judges") and score each team member on each criterion. See Article XIII infra, Appendix?D and Appendix?E.

E. Determining the Winner of an Argument

A tabulation committee organized by the National and Regional Vice Chairs for the respective competitions shall determine the combined brief and oral argument score. The oral argument score and the brief score are added to give the final score for a given team for a given round. The score weighting shall be as stated in Article X, Section 1, above.

F. Advancement to the Post? Preliminary/Octofinal Rounds

From the preliminary rounds, all teams will have a cumulative score, comprised of a brief score and oral argument. The teams with the highest cumulative scores shall be the teams that advance to the post?preliminary and Octofinal rounds.

G. Ties in Cumulative Scoring

If there is a tie in cumulative scoring for the last position available in the post?preliminary round tournament, the team with the highest brief score will advance. If teams are tied in brief score, then the winner will be determined by a coin toss in the manner, which is not unfairly prejudicial, he/she chooses to determine who will advance.

H. Protests/Penalties

Teams wishing to protest anything that has occurred during an oral argument must do so prior to the beginning of the judges' critique of the argument, which occurs approximately thirty (30) minutes after oral argument is completed. Protests will be made to the National or Regional Vice Chairs or a grievance committee representative who will assess the situation and determine whether it is necessary to consult with the judges of the round before deciding the matter. If such a consultation is needed, the critique will be delayed and the Vice Chair will put the question before the judges in the presence of the bailiff and the Chairperson of the grievance committee. The bailiff will not participate in the discussion with the judges unless specifically requested to do so; they are only present as observers. The conduct complained of will be described to the judges and the nature of the rule violation alleged explained. The judges shall state whether they were aware of said conduct and whether said conduct had an effect on their decision. Based on the comments of the judges, the Chairperson of the grievance committee will determine what effect, if any, the alleged misconduct had on the judges' decision. If necessary, the Chairperson of the grievance committee may convene the full committee to resolve a protest and determine remedies in accordance therewith.

I. Hierarchical Order of Protests & Appeals

All protests and appeals must proceed in hierarchical fashion.

At the Regional Competition the order protest and appellate review is: See Article XIV.
a. Regional Vice Chair;
b. Regional Grievance Committee;
c. National Vice Chair (in consultation with the National Chair as needed)

At the National Competition the order protest and appellate review is:
ii) National Moot Court Specialist
iii) National Vice Chair (in consultation with National Competition Grievance Committee if necessary);
iv) National Grievance Committee;
v) National Chair.

J. Unprofessional Behavior

All competitors must conduct themselves in a professional and respectful manner at all times. Behavior that is inconsistent with professional standards and common decency will not be tolerated. This includes, but is not limited to the use of profanity, physical and/or verbal threats, and disrespect of any person involved in the competition. If any team member engages in any type of inappropriate behavior, that team will be subject to immediate dismissal and disqualification at the discretion of the National Vice Chair, in consultation with the Regional Vice Chair and the Regional Director. This rule shall apply to Regional Competitions as well as the National Competition.

ARTICLE XI ? COMPETITION JUDGES

A. General Rules

The National and Regional Vice Chairs will recruit competent competition judges who may be law professors, judges or justices, or practicing attorneys. Regional Vice Chairs are urged to secure some appellate judges or attorneys with appellate experience or those that have experience judging moot court competitions. Enough competition judges should be recruited so as not to overload any judge with continuous judging.

B. Dissemination of Information

All judges must be briefed as to the competition rules and the law regarding the problem prior to judging.

1. Judges' Packets

At least two weeks before the competition, the judges should be given the sealed judges' packet containing a cover letter, a copy of the problem, a confidential bench memorandum and the competition rules. The National Vice Chair will send sealed judges' packets to each Regional Vice Chair. THESE PACKETS ARE NOT TO BE OPENED BY ANY OTHER PERSON THAN THE REGIONAL VICE CHAIR.

2. Substance of Orientation Meeting

Judges shall be informed during an orientation meeting of the scoring procedure and given adequate scoring sheets, together with judging criteria. Judges should also be informed as to procedure (i.e., time limits, role of bailiffs, asking questions, etc.). Judges shall be informed during the orientation meeting that judging shall be according to oral advocacy skills, without any consideration as to which team should win on the merits. Judges should also be advised that post?argument discussion between each of them as to which team should win is not recommended. Any discussion should be solely for the purpose of tabulating scores. Personal comments to the teams concerning the argument are at the discretion of the judges, but are encouraged. Judges should be reminded that the same problem will be argued in farther rounds and, therefore, it is of utmost importance that they not leave the bench memorandum lying about.

ARTICLE XII ?? BAILIFFS

A. General Rules

The Regional Vice Chair is responsible for recruiting bailiffs. Each argument must have one bailiff. The Regional Vice Chair is responsible for acquainting all bailiffs with the rules and scoring procedures. A bailiff orientation must be held by the Regional Vice Chair to review these rules and procedures prior to the first preliminary round. This orientation should not be held at the same time as the team orientation, though it may be part of the team orientation.

B. Bailiffs' Duties

1. Starting Oral Arguments

Bailiffs are responsible for ensuring that participants and judges are ready to begin the argument.

2. Assisting Competition Judges

Bailiffs' are to assist the judges when needed, to explain procedure to the judges, and to assist in the tabulation of scores and submit the score sheets for review.

3. Timing Oral Arguments

Bailiffs are responsible for timing the arguments. The bailiff will show periodic cards to each speaker that reflects what time is remaining of the speaker's allotted argument time, and one card to indicate that the speaker's time has expired. Before the beginning of each argument, the Bailiff will announce at what interval he/she will show the time?remaining cards. Bailiffs must show the cards to the speaker and to the judges.

4. Tabulations

The accuracy of the tabulations on the score sheet is the responsibility of the bailiff and the designated score sheet reviewers. However, the Vice Chair is responsible for ensuring that the score sheets were correctly tabulated before any team is allowed to advance.

ARTICLE XIII ? BRIEFS AND ORAL ARGUMENT
A. Briefs

Each team shall prepare a brief. A team may elect to write a brief as counsel for petitioner or counsel for respondent. In the event that multiple teams come from the same school, then approximately half of the teams from that school shall write a brief as counsel for petitioner and the remaining half shall write a brief as counsel for respondent. All briefs submitted shall become the exclusive property of the National Black Law Students Association.

1. Substantive Requirements

a. Overall Substance: The brief shall be a written argument reflecting the issues to be presented in oral argument to the Court. Participants should be aware that briefs will be judged for their content in specific sections, as well as the analysis. As a result, if a section is missing, the team will not get any of the points based on that section.

b. Revisions Not Allowed: A team may not revise its brief after submission to the National and Regional Vice Chairs.

c. Material to be Excluded: The brief should not include copies of the lower court opinions or the grant of certiorari. Material should only be attached as an appendix when absolutely necessary. The National Vice Chair will provide the brief judges with copies of all relevant statutes and treaty provision.

d. Statement of the Facts: The fact section shall include a full statement of legally relevant facts, not merely a statement of stipulation to the facts. The Statement of the facts shall be limited to the stipulated facts and necessary inferences from the problem. Though reasonable inferences may be drawn, no team is allowed to make up any facts or add any facts. The Statement of facts should not include unsupported facts, distortions of stated facts, or legal conclusions. The fact pattern is intentionally somewhat vague. Participants will be judged on their ability to persuasively convey the facts to conform to their arguments without changing the circumstances.

e. Summary of the Argument: The summary of the argument shall consist of a substantive summary of the pleadings presented in the brief, rather than a simple reproduction of the headings.

2. Formatting Requirements

a. Identification of Team: The brief shall be identified by the team identification letter, or combination thereof, placed in the upper right?hand comer of the front page of the brief by the applicable Vice Chair prior to any judging. The brief must include "Team Identification Letter" in the top right?hand comer of the front page to allow the applicable Vice Chair to assign brief numbers. No identification (i.e. school, name, nickname, etc.) of the team members should be placed anywhere on the brief itself. After brief numbers are assigned but before any judging occurs the teams will be notified of their Team Identification Letter. All teams that have been designated as Petitioners must submit a brief with a blue cover. All teams that have been designated as Respondent must submit a brief with a red cover.

b. Supreme Court Rules Preside: Briefs shall be in the format prescribed by the Rules of the Supreme Court of the United States, except as provided herein.

c. Page Size and Margins: Rule 33.1(d) of the Supreme Court of the United States will apply only to documents produced by standard typographic printing. Documents which are typewritten and duplicated by a photostat or similar process (i.e. Word processed and sent to a copy shop) shall be produced on opaque, unglazed paper,
8-1/2" x 11" in size, with typed matter not exceeding 6-1/2" x 9" (i.e. there must be a 1 inch margin on all sides). Typeface for brief must be in Courier or Courier New 12?point font.

d. Binding: Briefs shall be firmly bound at the left margin in a volume along the left margin. The binding may not obscure any part of the text.

e. Maximum Page Limit: The argument section has a maximum page limit of 30 pages. This page limit does not include the, questions presented, table of contents, table of authorities, citations to the opinions and judgments delivered in the courts below, and any constitutional provisions, treatises, statutes, ordinances, regulations which the case involves. Failure to comply with this rule may result in automatic disqualification or substantial penalties.

f. Citation Format: All citations shall conform to the latest edition of the Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation and must conform to the practitioner's section, therein.

g. Footnotes and Endnotes: Either footnotes or endnotes can be used (consistent use of one or the other is required). However, they are only to be used to note information to the court, not to cite supporting authority.

h. Additional Supreme Court Rules Inapplicable: Rule 25, 38, 29,30,33.4 and 35 of the Supreme Court of the United States shall not apply.

3. "Brief Writers" Prohibited

The brief must be the work product of and written by the registered team members only. Teams may not submit briefs prepared by school designated "brief writers." Failure to adhere to this rule will result in automatic disqualification of a team.

4. Filing of the Briefs

Competition materials (briefs) must be postmarked by December 13, 2002 via Certified United States Postal Service (USPS) to be considered on time and not receive a late penalty, as provided in Article VIII. "Postmark" means postmarked (dated) by the USPS on or before the deadline. Documents submitted using Federal Express or United Parcel Service will be treated, for the purpose of the deadline, as if submitted to the USPS. If a team chooses to use any other means of delivery, the timeliness of the brief will depend on when the brief is actually received (not when submitted for delivery). Retained receipts from the certified mailing/delivery service may serve as verification of filing. Metered postmarks may not be used. If a team wishes to receive confirmation that briefs were received, please provide a notification sheet and a self?addressed stamped envelope.

B. Oral Argument

1. Introduction of Team Members

At the commencement of each argument, the participants shall introduce themselves in the appropriate manner (i.e. Team A Counsel 1, 2, etc.). The name of his/her law school must not be mentioned before, during or after the argument or during the judges' critique. Failure to comply with this rule will result in automatic disqualification of the team.

2. Discussion with Judges

The only discussion with the judges permitted will be during the critique, which will be conducted by the judges in the presence of a bailiff and both teams after each argument.

3. Additional Supreme Court Rules Inapplicable and Time Limits

Rules 28.4, 28.3, 28.5 and 28.7 of the Supreme Court of the United States shall not apply. Each team is allotted a maximum of 30 minutes for the argument. No individual team member may argue for more than 17 minutes, including rebuttal. Once an advocate is informed that time is up, the advocate must stop and request additional time from the judges. The additional time requested must only be to conclude the point that the advocate was making before time expired and/or to answer a judge's question. It is not necessary for a team to use all of its allotted time.

Speaker will be docked 2 points from their individual score if they exceed their allotted time without express permission from the judge that allows the speaker to continue past their designated time. In addition, the team will be docked 2 points from the team total score if the team exceeds 30 minutes without express permission from a judge.

4. Use of Exhibits Prohibited

The use of exhibits is prohibited in the competition. No written or other prepared material shall be passed or showed to judges before, during, or after the argument.

5. Rebuttal Time

Prior to the commencement of the oral argument, the petitioner may reserve up to 5 minutes for rebuttal by notifying the Bailiff of the amount of time to be reserved and which team member will reserve the time. Once a rebuttal is requested, it cannot be waived. However, it is not necessary to use all the rebuttal time. Rebuttal can be waived before arguments, by indicating to the bailiff that the team does not wish to reserve rebuttal time. Rebuttal may not be divided between team members. If a team fails to request rebuttal time prior to its first argument, it automatically waives its right to a rebuttal.

6. Conduct

The latest edition of the ABA Model Code of Professional Responsibility and the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct binds the conduct of all team members and coaches. All questions as to violations and interpretations of either are reserved for the National Vice Chair.

ARTICLE XIV ?? PENALTIES

A. National Vice?Chair's Authority to Impose Penalties

The National Vice?Chair, upon consultation with the Regional Vice?Chair, may disqualify teams and assess penalties he/she deems necessary and proper. In the event that the National and Regional Vice?Chairs cannot come to consensus, the National Chair shall cast the deciding vote or make the final determination, whichever is appropriate.

B. Penalty Points for Oral Scores

There are no "penalty" points accessed by the Regional Vice Chair during the oral round, unless otherwise prescribed herein. See XIV (G), Appendix?D.

C. Failure to Postmark Brief

Failure to file a team brief postmarked by December 13, 2002 will result in a penalty of 5 points for every 24?hour period, or portion thereof. No deadline extensions may be granted. This deadline has been determined to account for any delays in the competition. Any and all briefs, which are postmarked after December 17, 2002, will not be accepted.

D. Failure to Meet Brief Formatting Requirement

Points shall be deducted from a team's brief score for failure to adhere to each of the formatting rules set forth in Article XIII. In computing deductions, judges will use a standardized score sheet (�2002?2003 FDMCC Standardized Briefing Score Sheet"). The standardized score sheet will be posted to the web, along with the transcript of the record and rules and incorporated, herein, by reference. See Appendix?C, infra.

NOTE: Competitors are hereby notified that Brief Judges are restricted to the FDMCC Briefing Score Sheet when reviewing the substantive portions of a team's brief.

E. Failure to Submit Letter of Good Standing

Failure to submit a letter of good standing from a team's school registrar office prior to the commencement of the competition shall result in automatic disqualification.

F. Confidentiality of Certain Competition Material

A team will be disqualified for using any FDMCC information that is marked "CONFIDENTIAL" or is obviously confidential from the content.

G. Penalty for Exceeding Time Limits During Oral Rounds
Before each round, each team should inform the bailiff of how it intends to divide its allotted time. After time has expired, the speaker must immediately conclude his argument unless any judge allows the speaker to proceed. Speaker will be docked 2 points from their individual score if they exceed their allotted time without express permission from the judge that allows the speaker to continue past their designated time. In addition, the team will be docked 2 points from the team total score if the team exceeds 30 minutes without express permission from a judge. Overall a team can be docked a total of 4 points if a team member exceeds his/her designated time AND if the team exceeds 30 minutes of total time.

H. Other Important Notes

The penalties provided herein are all the penalties that are allowed to be levied against a team. The Regional Vice Chair may not levy any penalties, not described herein, against a team. Participants should also note that certain rules have a provision for disqualification, if the particular rule is not followed. Should a team be disqualified for any reason their fees shall be forfeited, regardless of the time that disqualification is levied.

ARTICLE XV ? AWARDS

A. There shall be an award given to the National winning team (the "FDMCC National Champion Award").

B. There shall be an award given to the National runner?up team (the "FDMCC First National Runner?Up Award").

C. There shall be an award given to the National Best Oral Advocate (the "FDMCC National Best Oral Advocate Award") as determined by taking the highest average of all preliminary oral argument scores awarded in the National preliminary rounds.

D. There shall be an Honorable Mention Award (the "Helen Dawn Williams Oral Advocacy Award") given to the second highest oral advocate in the National preliminary rounds.

E. There shall be an award given to the National Best Brief for the Respondent (the "FDMCC National Best Respondent Brief Award") as determined by taking the highest average of the scores awarded to respondent briefs by the National panel of brief judges.

F. There shall be an award given to the National Best Brief for the Petitioner (the "FDMCC National Best Petitioner Brief Award") as determined by taking the highest average of the scores awarded to petitioner briefs by the National panel of brief judges.

G. There shall be a certificate given to each National Competitor for ascending and competing at the National Rounds of the Frederick Douglass Moot Court Competition (the "National Vice Chair's Certificate of Excellence in Appellate Advocacy").

H. There shall be an award given to each Regional winning team ("The FDMCC [region's name] Regional Champion Award").
I. There shall be an award given to each Regional runner? up team (the "FDMCC [region's name] First Regional Runner?up Award").

J. Recognition and commendation shall be given to each Regional Best Oral Advocate (the "FDMCC Best Oral Advocate [region's name] Region Award") as determined by the highest average of all oral argument scores awarded in the preliminary rounds at the Regional Convention.

K. There shall be an award given for each Regional Best Brief for the Respondent (the "FDMCC Best Respondent Brief [region's name] Region Award") as determined by the highest average of the scores awarded to respondent briefs by the Regional brief judges.

L. There shall be an award given for each Regional Best Brief for the Petitioner (the "FDMCC Best Petitioner Brief [region's name] Region Award") as determined by taking the highest average of the scores awarded to petitioner briefs by the Regional panel of brief judges.

ARTICLE XVI ?? NATIONAL COMPETITION

Unless expressly enumerated, all of the rules contained herein apply at all levels of FDMCC competition.

ARTICLE XVII ? INTERPRETATION OF RULES AND GRIEVANCES

A. Official Interpretations
All official interpretations of these rules are the National Vice Chair's responsibility unless expressly provided for herein. Requests for official interpretations of these rules or the settlement of grievances shall be submitted in writing to the National Vice Chair.

B. Submission of Request
Teams may submit anonymous requests for interpretation or the settlement of grievances without disclosing the names of the teams, participants or other parties involved.

C. Answers
All answers to questions will be posted as expediently as possible on the World Wide Web via www.nblsa.org so that all participants may benefit from official interpretations and inconsistent interpretations among participants may be avoided.

D. Questions, Comments and Concerns
All questions, comments and concerns regarding the 2002?2003 FDMCC shall be directed to the National Vice Chair. The following contact information is provided:

Tracie T. Melvin
NBLSA National Vice Chair
University of Iowa
412 6th Ave. Apt. 7
Iowa City, IA 52241
(319) 594-3885
[email protected]

ARTICLE XVIII ? WAIVER OF THE RULES AND PROCEDURES

A. Waiver of Rules Request

The National Vice Chair may grant waivers of these rules. All waiver requests must be submitted in writing and in a timely fashion to the National Vice Chair. Such waivers are only to be granted in extreme and extraordinary circumstances.

B. Supreme Court's Rule 29 Inapplicable

Rule 29 of the United Supreme Court rules shall not apply.

C. Supplemental Rules

Regional Vice Chairs shall not make any supplemental rule that will conflict, as that term is defined in Article XVIII, Section C(l) herein, with these rules, nor shall any supplemental rules be imposed that in any manner changes the substance or procedure of the competition. However, the Regional Vice Chair, after receiving the written approval of the National Vice Chair, may make additional rules necessary to conduct the Regional rounds, provided that such rule is not repugnant to or inconsistent with the National rules and provided that all Regional teams are given full and timely notice.

1. The term "conflict" means any change in the substance or procedure of the competition, rules or referenced rule.

D. Resemblance to Actual Events or Individuals

The persons and events depicted in this problem are purely fictional and were prepared solely for the educational exercise being conducted by the NBLSA. Any resemblance to actual persons, living or deceased, is unintentional and purely coincidental.

E. Rules Compiled By

These Rules include and incorporate all previous rules and amendments through the 2003 NBLSA General Convention and were compiled by:

Ms. Tracie T. Melvin: National Vice Chair 2002?2003

APPENDIX ? A

THE NATIONAL BLACK LAW STUDENTS' ASSOCIATION'S
FREDERICK DOUGLASS MOOT COURT COMPETITION
CERTIFICATION AND ENTRY FORM

[Cite as: 2002-2003 FDMCC Rules *? App. A.]

We, the undersigned individually and collectively, certify that the ________________ (insert your school's name) brief is solely the work product of the undersigned and we have not received faculty, brief writer, or other outside assistance, as that team is defined under Article VII, Section A (3)(d) of the 2002-2003 Rules of the Frederick Douglass Moot Court Competition. We further certify that we have complied with all of the rules as stated and referenced in the 2002-2003 Rules of the Frederick Douglass Moot Court Competition. We further acknowledge that this certification form is also the Frederick Douglass Moot Court Competition Registration Form.
We, the undersigned individually and collectively, certify that copies of our brief that have been served on the Regional Vice Chair and National Vice Chair are identical in every respect and are in accordance the 2002-2003 Rules Of The Frederick Douglass Moot Court Competition.
We, the undersigned individually and collectively, certify that we have complied with the honor code, or its equivalent, of the _____________________________ (insert school's name).
We, the undersigned individually and collectively, certify that we have read, understand, and agree to be bound by the 2002-2003 Rules of the Frederick Douglass Moot Court Competition.

Team Member #1    ____________________________________
(Type or legibly print team member #1�s name)

      ____________________________________
(Signature of Team Member #1's name)

Team Member #2    ____________________________________
(Type or legibly print team member #2's name)

      ____________________________________
(Signature of Team Member #2's name)

Contact Person     ____________________________________

E-mail address     ____________________________________

Please send all correspondence to: ____________________________________

      ____________________________________

      ____________________________________

Dated this the __________________ day of _____________________ in the year of 2002.

BRIEF SIDE DESIGNATION: _____________________

SPACE BELOW TO BE USED BY REGIONAL and/or NATIONAL VICE CHAIR ONLY
TEAM IDENTIFICATION LETTER ________

DATE OF POST MARK ________________

NUMBER OF DAYS LATE ________________

TOTAL POINT PENALTY ________________

DATE ENTRY FEE RECEIVED ________________

AMOUNT PAID   ________________

APPENDIX - B

2002-2003 FDMCC STANDARDIZED BRIEF SCORE SHEET
FREDERICK DOUGLASS MOOT COURT COMPETITION
[Cite as: 2002-2003 FDMCC Rules * App. B.]

Shaded Sections For Use By Vice Chair only
Team Identification Letter: ______   Brief Judge: ___________________

Team ____ Ranks ____ out of ____ Teams Total Points (Max. 50) ________

Possible Given
A. Formalistic Requirements     1. Brief Cover� Is the brief cover correctly set up? (2)
     2. Table of Contents� Are the sections of the brief in the proper sequence?� Does the brief contain all the necessary components? (4)
     3. Question(s) Presented� Are the issues phrased such that answer naturally favors moving party?� Do the issues include the essential facts of the case?
1. Table of Authorities & Citation Form� Proper division of cases between federal circuits (and state if applicable)?� Logical division and arrangement of statutory authority and secondary sources? Total possible for these lines: (4)� Are citations to legal authorities correct (i.e. Conform to Bluebook format)? Points are given for having the least amount of errors. Total possible this line: (6)- 0 to 3 errors: Receives 6 points- 4 or 5 errors: Receives 3 points- 6 or more errors: Receives 0 points (10)
2. Statement of the Case & Facts� Are the facts written in a persuasive fashion without neglecting material facts? (5)
3. Summary of the Arguments� Does the summary condense the argument without regurgitating the headings?� The focus here is on a persuasive and concise summary. (5)
4. Appendix� Have the writers made the correct decision whether to include an appendix?� If an appendix is used, are the proper items for insertion in an appendix used? (2)
Subtotal Of First Page: (30)

B. Substantive Requirements1. Structure� Is the structure logical and indicative of the issues?� Do the arguments follow in a logical manner?� Do the arguments compel a conclusion in the writer's favor?� Are the arguments organized in a clear and persuasive manner? Possible Given
(20)
2. Issue Recognition� Did the arguments include all the necessary and material issues? (8)
3. Appropriate Use of Headings & Text� Are the headings correct and do they test/press the argument without incorrectly stating substantive facts?� Was the tone of both the headings and the text properly developed? (10)
4. Appropriate Use of AuthorityTotal possible for the bullets below: (10)� Have the leading cases been used?� Do the authorities support a sound legal analysis?� Have relevant statutes been cited with the appropriate legislative history?� Have persuasive secondary authorities been used without excessive reliance?� Have public policy arguments been developed when appropriate?Total possible for the bullets below: (5)� Has the brief incorporated the facts of cited cases to inform and persuade� Have the cases and authorities been used effectively without over use?Total possible for the bullets below: (5)� Has the brief distinguished cases and important authorities that are unfavorable to its position?C. Stylistic Score� Is the brief clear and unambiguous?� Has there been proper (i.e. persuasive) word choice by the writer?� Has there been excessive use of quotations?� Has the brief effectively used the allotted space? (30 page limit)� Has there been appropriate use of creativity? (20)(12)
Subtotal Of Second Page: (70)
Subtotal Of First Page: (30)

Subtotal of Second Page: (70)

Wrong Brief SidePostmarked After DECEMBER 13, 2002(Minus 5Pts Per 24Hr. Period) (-10)(-?)

Total Brief Score: (100)
APPENDIX � C

GUIDELINES FOR ORAL JUDGES
FREDERICK DOUGLASS MOOT COURT COMPETITION
[Cite as: 2002-2003 FDMCC Rules *? App. C.]

Your judging should be independent. The scoring of the oral argument must not be affected by your personal views of the merits of the case. Instead, it should be based on the speakers' advocacy skills. The scoring on the official ballot is extremely important because it determines the teams that will advance, receive certain awards, and the future seeding based on the cumulative scores. Therefore, if a round is not close, please do not score it close. The total cumulative score for each counsel should range between 25 to 50 as outlined below:

A) EVIDENCE of RESEARCH; KNOWLEDGE of the RECORD, ISSUES, AND LAW; ORGANIZATION; REASONING (min. 13 pt. ? max. 25 pt.)

1) Does counsel give a broad but brief overview of the argument?
2) Does counsel have a thorough knowledge of the record? Is counsel able to direct you to important language therein?
3) Does counsel emphasize the important issues?
4) Does counsel argue the heart of the matter and is he/she selective in discussing issues?
5) Does counsel employ reason and logic rather than just relying upon precedents?
6) Are counsels' arguments clear and direct?
7) Are the issues firmly fixed in the court's mind when counsel leaves the court?

B) Ability To Answer Questions (min. 5 pts. ? max. 10 pts.)

1) Is counsel responsive to questions rather than evasive or repeatedly unable to give an answer? (Deferring to one's partner is permissible where such a question involves the other team members' argument, but if that person fails to answer the question in his or her argument, then the latter may be penalized at your discretion).
2) Is counsel able to answer questions with authority, either theoretically or with case law?
3) Is counsel able to fit relevant questions into his or her overall analysis and argument?
4) Is counsel able to continue his or her argument following a question?
5) Is counsel candid about weak points in his or her argument?

C) Is Counsel Convincing Irrespective of the Merits (min. 2pt-max. 5 pt)

D) Forensic Performance (min. 3 pts. ? max. 5 pts.)

1) Does counsel use correct pronunciation and grammar?
2) Does counsel use timely emphasis?
3) Does counsel effectively use pauses?
4) Is counsel's voice clear rather than inaudible or difficult to understand?
5) Does counsel have proper volume, loud but not overbearing or argumentative?
6) Does counsel use "ahs," "ers," "ums" or other distracting crutches?

E) Courtroom Demeanor (min. 2 pts. ? max. 5 pts.)

1) Is counsel trying to be helpful to the court?
2) Does counsel project an image of professional sincerity towards his or her client?
3) Does counsel have distracting non?verbal mannerisms?
4) Does counsel maintain good eye contact?
5) Does counsel know his or her argument or does he or she refer excessively to notes or read a prepared text (i.e. canned answers)?
6) Is counsel courteous rather than sarcastic, condescending or resentful?

APPENDIX ? D

2002?2003 STANDARDIZED ORAL SCORE SHEET
FREDERICK DOUGLASS MOOT COURT COMPETITION

ROUND_________________________

1.              PETITIONER TEAM IDENTIFICATION LETTER ______

Counsel No. 1 Mr./Ms ____________________Min. Max. Counsel No. 2 Mr./Ms. ________________Min. Max.
13 25 Evidence of research; knowledge of the record, issues and law;organization and reasoning. 13 25
05 10 Ability to answer questions 05 10
02 05 Is counsel convincing irrespective of the merits 02 05
03 05 Forensic performance (i.e. pronunciation, grammar,use of voice and inflection) 03 05
02 05 Courtroom demeanor and conduct 02 05
Time Designated__________Time Used_______________Penalty__________________ OVERALL TEAMTIME USED_________PENALTY__________ Time Designated________Time Used_____________Penalty________________
COUNSEL No. 1 Total Score______ OVERALL TEAMTOTAL SCORE______   COUNSEL No. 2 Total Score_____

Judge's Signature: ___________________________
Judge's Signature: ___________________________
Judge's Signature: ___________________________

COMMENTS

2002?2003 STANDARDIZED ORAL SCORE SHEET (continued)
FREDERICK DOUGLASS MOOT COURT COMPETITION

ROUND_________________________

2.           RESPONDENT TEAM IDENTIFICATION LETTER _____

Counsel No. 3 Mr./Ms ____________________Min. Max. Counsel No. 4 Mr./Ms. __________________Min. Max.
13 25 Evidence of research; knowledge of the record, issues and law;organization and reasoning. 13 25
05 10 Ability to answer questions 05 10
02 05 Is counsel convincing irrespective of the merits 02 05
03 05 Forensic performance (i.e. pronunciation, grammar,use of voice and inflection) 03 05
02 05 Courtroom demeanor and conduct 02 05
Time Designated__________Time Used_______________Penalty__________________ OVERALL TEAMTIME USED_________PENALTY__________ Time Designated________Time Used_____________Penalty________________
COUNSEL No. 1 Total Score______ OVERALL TEAMTOTAL SCORE______   COUNSEL No. 2 Total Score_____

Judge's Signature: ___________________________
Judge's Signature: ___________________________
Judge's Signature: ___________________________

COMMENTS

APPENDIX ? E

ADDITIONAL EXAMPLE NOTED IN ARTICLE IX(A)(8)

WITHOUT SWAPPING TEAMSAssuming there are 8 teams in the Quarterfinal Round.Team Ranked vs. Team Ranked1 vs. 8 = 9 (target joint? seeding number) vs. 7 = 9 vs. 6 = 9 vs. 5 = 9 CORRECT METHOD OF SWAPPING TEAMS [Per Art. IX (A)(8)]Assuming there are 8 teams in the Quarterfinal Round.Team Ranked vs. Team Ranked1 vs. 7 = 8 (joint?seeding number)NOTE: The target joint?seeding point number was nine (9) and this is as close to equaling the target joint?seeding number as possible. Thereby, maintaining the integrity of power seeding in the post?preliminary rounds with out undue prejudice.2 VS. 8 = 103 vs. 6 = 94 vs. 5 = 9INCORRECT METHOD OF SWAPPING TEAMS[BY WAY OF EXAMPLE ONLY]Assuming there are 8 teams in the Quarterfinal Round.Team Ranked vs. Team Ranked1 VS. 6 = 7 (joint?seeding number)2 vs. 5 = 73 vs. 7=104 vs. 8 = 12NOTE: The target joint?seeding point number was nine (9) and this is method does not get as close to equaling the target joint?seeding number as possible. Thereby, destroying the benefit of a power seeding in post?preliminary rounds.