National Professional Responsibility Moot Court Competition
2014 Competition Information: March 14-15, 2014
The Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law Moot Court Board held the 3rd Annual National Professional Responsibility Moot Court Competition on March 14-15, 2014, in Indianapolis, Indiana.
This two-day competition was open to all ABA-accredited law schools throughout the United States and focused on a question of professional responsibility.
The NPRMCC is grateful for the support received for this competition from the Timothy J. Kennedy Memorial Moot Court Fund created by Montross Miller Muller Mendelson & Kennedy in memory of their partner, colleague and friend of more than 30 years.
Legal and judicial ethics, professional regulation, professionalism, and client protection pertain to every practitioner, no matter what legal field. The National Professional Responsibility Moot Court Competition will offer students an outstanding opportunity to engage in advocacy on cutting edge professional responsibility concerns. The moot will test skills in appellate brief writing and oral advocacy on two specific issues drawn from real opinions, providing experience in interpreting professional responsibility standards and scholarly resources first hand.
Oral arguments began on Friday, March 14 and concluded on Saturday, March 15. Rounds of the competition mainly took place at Inlow Hall, 530 W. New York St., Indianapolis, IN, 46202, and at other appropriate venues in Indianapolis.
2014 National Professional Responsibility Moot Court Competition Problem:
- Question: Concerning the universe listed in the Appendix—number 10, In re Loblaw, appears to be a fictitious case. I am assuming that the case will be posted online?
- Response: The case is fictitious from Illiana; the only relevant portion of the case is that portion which has been provided in the problem; no other information about the case will be provided.
- Question: Does the fact that this is a closed universe problem mean that no resource other than the materials or on the list of materials that are provided may be used, including any cases interpreting those cases? Does this exclude the Model Rules of Professional Conduct? Would this exclude other states' rules of Professional Conduct as well?
- Response: Rule III.I. provides as follows: "The problem is a closed universe. Competitors may not use any cases, law review articles, or any other materials beyond the list of authorities provided. Any source cited in the authorities provided in the list in the appendix of the record may also be used." This rule permits using any authority listed in the appendix and any authority cited in the authority listed in the appendix. No other authority may be used.
In the appendix, there also is a stipulation that "[a]part from the rules specifically set forth in the record, Illiana's Rules of Professional Conduct are identical to the Model Rules of Professional Conduct." This stipulation permits using any Model Rules of Professional Conduct, including their comments, not already specifically set forth in the record. Those Model Rules and comments would be identical to Illiana's Rules and comments.
- Question: On page eight of The Illiana Review Board’s opinion there is a footnote 8 after the word “unpersuaded.” However, only footnotes six and seven are found at the bottom of that page. Then on the next page the next footnote is number nine, skipping from seven over eight. Is there supposed to be a footnote 8?
- Response: Footnote 8 does not exist. This was left in from the editing process accidentally
- Question: Will we be able to view our seeds, and the scores of the briefs, before the deadline to protest and challenge our competitor's briefs?
- Response: We will not be providing the teams their seeding’s or their brief scores pursuant to Rule V(B).
- Question: How does the power-protection factor into guaranteeing one on-brief argument and one off-brief argument?
- Response: Teams will argue one time on-brief and one-time off-brief. Pursuant to the rules, “teams will continue to be power-protected by their seeds in Round 2. However, no team will face the same team it faced in Round 1.” Remember that pursuant to the rules, being power protected basically means that “higher-seeded teams will be pitted against lower seeded teams.
*To contact the National Professional Responsibility Moot Court Competition, email firstname.lastname@example.org.