MSL’s Appellate Moot Court Team Brings Home Three Major Awards from the American Constitution Society’s Prestigious Moot Court Competition

Four teams from the Massachusetts School of Law competed in the 2011 American Constitution Society’s Constance Baker Motley National Moot Court Competition in Constitutional Law. The eastern regional competition was held in Boston at Suffolk University Law School, and the competitors represented many of the most prestigious law schools in the United States.  MSL’s teams were: Laurie Lemieux and Paul Stewart; Courtney Pasay and Joe Andriolo; Caroline Flanders and Marissa Hederson; and Casey Powers and Dan Thompson. 

Preparing four teams to compete in such a demanding appellate tournament requires a considerable commitment from faculty as well as students. Coaches Malaguti, Rudnick and Starkis gratefully accepted substantial and thoughtful assistance from Professors Kurt Olson, Ed Becker and Katherine Bowles Dudich, as well as alumni coaches Ben Simanski and Kathleen Mulligan. The student competitors made clear to the primary coaches numerous times that the participation of Olson, Becker, Bowles Dudich, Simanski and Mulligan was integral to their overall success.

The competition began on Saturday, March 26 with three rounds of oral arguments by each team.  MSL teams won three major awards at the award reception held on Saturday evening. Casey Powers and Dan Thompson won the Best Brief award for the Petitioners. Paul Stewart and Laurie Lemieux won the Best Brief award for the Respondents. Unbelievably, the Lemieux/Stewart and Thompson/Powers teams tied (with two other teams) for highest overall brief score in the competition. Additionally, the team of Dan Thompson and Casey Powers were honored for being one of only eight teams (from a total of 35 teams) to advance to the quarterfinals on Sunday.

All four of MSL’s teams devoted scores of hours researching, writing briefs and practicing their oral arguments. Although technically divided into four separate teams for the purpose of competition, both the coaches and student competitors considered themselves to be a cohesive unit working toward the uniform goal of ensuring that each participant would reach his or her potential. It therefore was not surprising that all four teams won matches and argued exceptionally well. All of the MSL student advocates received glowing praise from the judges who scored the competitions and provided personal feedback. Although Casey and Dan did not advance to the final four, they lost an elimination match in the quarterfinals that the judges announced was extremely close, and that virtually every observer believed could have just as easily gone the other way.

For MSL’s Appellate Moot Court Team to have brought home three major awards in a competition that historically has been dominated by the Columbia, Harvard, Stanford, and Berkeley law schools is truly remarkable. It is a testament to the student competitors’ intelligence, motivation, teamwork, collegiality and attention to detail.  And, along with the impressive record of MSL’s Trial Advocacy teams, it serves as yet another example that MSL delivers on its promise to provide a great legal education that emphasizes the actual skills employed in the practice of law while doing so affordably.  

MSL’s four-year participation in the ACS Moot Court competition is marked by remarkable success. In its first year – 2008 – Kathleen Mulligan and Tania Palumbo won the Best Brief award (their score was highest in the country). In its second year, Ben Simanski and Tania Palumbo wrote the 5th-best brief in the eastern regional competition. Last year, Paul Stewart won the Best Oral Advocate award in the western regional competition. And in 2011, we had two Best Brief awards and a final-eight team.

“Great trial lawyers,” “great appellate lawyers:” it’s the MSL way!