Stanford Law School - Yearbook (Palo Alto, CA)

Page 168 text:

Moor COURT W.. 'Qi G ' . '51 ' 5, sa a as X 334- ' K' - Ai e 55.1 'gl' A il! l - i x fill lift L .N X .X xxx if iv if 5 li 1' tif: MOOT COURT BOARD: SEATED f R. Kimball, L. Title CPres.J, R. :I gloiqnipgstar. STANDING - J. Beery, R. Rychlik, R. Kirst, T. Keech, G. er e ey. jg! The Stanford Moot Court program is designed to improve the students' skills of brief writing and oral advocacy. The program grew significantly larger for the second year in succession. The resurgence of the Moot Court Board can be seen in terms of the number of students participating as well as the number of programs in which they participated. Moot Court has again become a valuable educational experience for that group of second and third year students who aspire to leam those aspects of advocacy that can be taught. Appellate Practice Seminars, an innovation during the previous year, were the major activity of the fall semester. Participation in these seminars increased over fifty percent from the previous year. Training in the Appellate Practice Seminars centered around preparation of written briefs under the close scrutiny of practicing attorneys and third year Board members. Attention was focused on analysing the lower court record, organizing the main issues on appeal and drafting a brief using a variety of different sources to support the arguments presented. Students benefitted not only from the unique opportunity of getting a close-up view of the entire appellate process but from the personal supervision and criticism that the attorneys provided. The Board initiated an Oral Advocacy Program in the fall with the intention of enabling those who wanted to develop their oral advocacy skills to argue from briefs prepared by others. Thus, for example, students were given the actual briefs submitted by counsel in a recent search and seizure case decided by the California Supreme Court, and by developing their oral arguments from these materials they gained valuable experience in oral advocacy without having to spend large amounts of time preparing a brief. This program together with the Appellate Practice Seminars provided excellent preparation for the Kirkwood Competition. The annual Marion Rice Kirkwood Competition is the culmination of the Moot Court programs. While participation in the Appellate Practice Seminars and the Oral Advocacy Program is of great advantage to the students who have that additional training, entry in the Kirkwood Competition is open to all second and third year students. Participation in this year's Kirkwood increased more than seventy-tive percent from the previous year, which meant that many fine advocates were eliminated before the eight semi-Hnalists were selected. Only four ofthe original entrants remained when the finals were held in Dinkelspiel Auditorium before a distinguished panel consisting of the Hon. Walter J. Cummings, Judge of the United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuitg the Hon. Ernest W. McFarland, Justice of the Arizona Supreme Courtg and Professor Paul Freund of the Harvard Law School. A large audience heard the four tinalists test their advocacy skills while arguing whether the Constitution will permit the incarceration of a juvenile on a lesser showing of proof than required to convict an adult of a similar offense. During both the first and semi-final rounds of the Kirkwood Competition every competitor's brief was read and criticized not only by each member of the three judge panel which heard his particular argument but also by at least three Moot Court Board members. Their arguments having been repeatedly challenged and refined, the finalists rewrote their briefs before the last round. This aspect of the Competition is of great educational benefit to Board members as well as participants. Members of the Board and candidates for membership almost unanimously regard time spent on the Moot Court program as time well spent. The candidates' experience is one of great practical value beyond providing the academic discipline of careful analysis and clear, concise writing. The third year Board members devoted considerable time and effort to restructuring the Boardis programs in an effort to maximize the value of the experience to all concerned. With the introduction of student practice in Califomia courts next year, new alterations will undoubtedly be required to maintain the dynamic quality that has become associated with the Moot Court Board. Larljy Title

Page 167 text:

' All ' 1 1 il v 3: if X I Bailiff A1 swears in Don, playing the lecherous old judge. ' -FA 4 1 ,. Peter argues an objection while Shep is thinking, the bigger they are, the harder they fall? gm Now, Betty, you are under oathg what are you doing after the trial tonight? Shep argues that the testimony is outrageous. Non-law students make excellent witnesses fleftj as well as the juries that have to listen to Willie pray for a favorable verdict Cbelowj.

Page 169 text:

L. K. Gould argues in the preliminary round of the 1970 Marion Rice Kirkwood Competition while Steve Stevens prepares his rebuttal. all Roger Kirst, winner of the 1969 Marion Rice Kirkwood Competition, drives home a point, picking up quite a few in the process. Ted Keech ponders a point in the 1969 Kirkwood Competition finals. ' 2 I I 1 Dr. Max Rafferty, the Honorable Tom Clark, and the Honorable Skelley-Wright listen attentively to the final round arguments in the 1969 Marion Rice Kirkwood Competition.