|
2006 Rules Q&A
Q1: Our team began preparation for the Pace Competition
at the beginning of this semester by having our coaches assign a
Practice Problem. The problem deals with a case currently on appeal
before the 1st Circuit, for which our environmental clinic submitted
an amici brief. We completed the problem and turned it in prior to the
distribution of Pace's 2005-06 Competition Problem. However, because
of the way that our Fall Recess fell, we were unable to meet to
discuss the coaches' feedback before last Friday. We are asking for
clarification of the rule dealing with student contact with coaches.
It reads:
RULE VI. FACULTY OR OTHER ASSISTANCE
No Team shall receive assistance of any kind prior to filing its
brief. No Team shall receive assistance of any kind during an oral
argument at the Competition or during any adjournment thereof.
Under the rules, are we allowed to discuss our practice problem and
receive feedback from our coaches? Our reading of the rule suggests
that such a discussion would not fall outside of the boundaries
established by the rules as there would be no assistance by the
coaches. Rather, it would be a critique of a wholly unrelated project.
A1: Given your situation, if your coach is providing
feedback to specifically address and critique the contents of your
amici brief and the brief is not in any way related to the NELMCC Problem (i.e. the brief does not address any of the issues presented
or issues related to the NELMCC Problem), then it is not a violation
of the NELMCC Rules. However, if your coach has read the NELMCC Problem and is addressing your amici brief with the knowledge that
his/her feedback would help you write or prepare your NELMCC Brief,
then it is a violation of Rule VI.
♦♦♦
Back to Top
Q2: Can you please tell me what jurisdiction
the brief is supposed to be for?
A2: The Problem indicates that the appellants are of the
TOWN OF NOBLESVILLE and State of NEW UNION, which are fictitious. We
advise that you review the Problem, Official Rules as well as the
Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure carefully.
♦♦♦
Q3: Regarding assistance from non-team members, Rule IV states:
"No Team shall receive assistance of any kind prior to filing its
brief. No Team shall receive assistance of any kind during an
oral argument at the Competition or during any adjournment thereof."
My question is does this apply only to assistance with the actual
research and composition of the brief, or to any assistance
whatsoever. For instance, may we speak with our team coach for
advice or assistance with issues of team organization, planning, or
other similar sorts of activities not directly related to the
problem and the brief itself. If not, what sorts of
communication may we have with our team coach during the period
prior to the filing of the brief?
A3: Yes, you may speak to your team coach for advice or
assistance with issues of team organization, planning and other
sorts of activities NOT directly related to the Problem or the Brief
itself.
♦♦♦
Q4: Is it allowed within the rules that I may give a copy of the
problem to the team coach at this point, or should I wait until
after the brief is filed to do so?
A4: Your team coach is allowed to have a copy of the Problem.
However, your team coach may NOT provide any assistance related to
the Problem including assistance to writing the Brief and developing
arguments prior to the Brief being submitted.
♦♦♦
Back to Top
Q5:
The Board has received a few queries regarding a member of a
registered team who must withdraw and a replacement for that member.
A5:
Please refer to Rules
III
(B) and IV (A).
♦♦♦
Q6:
Rule VI states that no team can receive assistance of any kind
during an oral argument at the Competition or during any adjournment
thereof. Will you please clarify
the scope of the term adjournment? Does
it extend to the time between rounds? More
specifically can the teams meet with the accompanying student coach to
debrief completed oral arguments and to form and adapt strategies for
upcoming oral arguments?
A6:
Your team may meet with the accompanying student coach to
debrief only at the END of each round of oral arguments. A faculty
member or coach is prohibited from assisting the team during the oral
arguments of the Competition. No help is allowed during adjournment or
recess of any oral argument during the Competition, regardless of the
reason for the adjournment. However, assistance is allowed at the end
of each round of oral arguments during the Competition.
♦♦♦
Q7:
Rule V (D)(1) states that "[e]ach Team participant in each
preliminary round will argue two issues." This seems to
mean that only 4 issues (rather than all 6) will be argued during each
preliminary round by each Team. If this is the case, will the
judges tell us which arguments they expect us to make, or will it be
up to our Team to determine which 4 issues of the 6 to argue? This
is confusing to me because normally I would expect the two advocates
for each Team to argue 3 issues each, since there are 6 issues.
A7: Thanks for bringing this issue to our
attention. Rule V (D)(1) was initially drafted around a
four-issue problem. However, this year, there are six issues. The
Court of Appeals order instructs all the issues your team should be
prepared to argue. Your team may divide the issues however you choose.
♦♦♦
Back to Top
Q8: Can team members discuss generalities of the Clean
Water Act with faculty or practicing attorneys in an attempt to gain
better understanding for improved general practical knowledge?
A8: I advise you to carefully read Rule VI which
prohibits "assistance of any kind prior to filing your
brief." Rule VI is
meant to prevent assistance relating to the filing of the actual
NELMCC brief. If you are
discussing only generalities of the Clean Water Act, which will not
assist you in the preparation of your brief, then it is permissible.
♦♦♦
Q9: I
want to confirm whether a team may brief any of the three parties, and
that each of the three members of the team argues for a different
party at oral arguments - that each team argues all three party sides.
A9:
Yes,
you are correct. Please
find the oral argument procedures on the website at http://law.pace.edu/environmentalm/2006-oral-argument-procedures.pdf.
Rules for writing the brief are found under Rule IV: http://www.law.pace.edu/environmentalm/moot-rules.html.
♦♦♦
Q10:
In the Quarterfinal, Semifinal and Final Rounds, do the teams
again argue from each party point of view, or do they only argue one
party's point of view?
A10: Each team will argue one party's point of view in
the quarter, semi and final rounds.
Back to Top
♦♦♦
Q11: Are you planning to post an updated version of the
Record on the website? If not, to what are the students supposed
to cite when writing their briefs - to this email?
A11: A revised version of the Record has been sent out
in PDF format to all competitors via email. It has also been
posted to the web at http://law.pace.edu/environmentalm/2006%20NELMCC/2006-final-problem-revised.pdf.
Your brief should cite to the REVISED official version of the Problem
sent on November 22 and not the original hard copy sent in October.
|
