Questions & Answers
Q1. Will we be penalized if we don’t address the standing issue during oral argument, since the standing issue cannot be dispositive in this case because StarTests will still have standing to bring the 41(g) motion, even if the CFL does not?
A: Judges make their own determinations on scoring. Prior to oral arguments, the judges are given a bench memo that addresses the governing legal standards and questions presented. Judges record their scores on a scoring sheet – a sample is provided in the Rules. We are therefore unable to give you a definitve answer on whether individual judges will or will not penalize you for not addressing the standing issue.
Q2. Are we permitted to take into account the amendments to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure that went into effect on December 1 regarding the seizure of electronically stored information?
A: There is no restriction on using the amendments to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
Q3. Can the person who serves as our team’s brief grader critique our practice arguments after the briefs are turned in on Jan. 13?
A: No, brief graders have to be completely independent from the team. This is especially important for the month before the tournament when brief graders will be grading other competitors’ briefs.
Q4. There are 2 inconsistencies that we found…
1) The date the Colonial Football League began requiring its franchises to have drug tests. District ct says 2003 (page 1) and the appellate ct says 2005 (page 8).
2) The name of the players the FBI was investigating. District ct says Barry Reynolds (page 1) and appellate ct says John Reynolds (page 7)
A: The date should read 2005. “John” Reynolds should be “Barry”.
Q5: What date will the briefs be released to brief graders and when are the graded briefs due by?
A: Briefs will be released to the graders on January 15th, 2010. The graders will need to return the graded briefs to us by February 5th, 2010.
Q6: Will the brief grader receive a copy of the bench memorandum?
A: Yes
Q7: Are the two opinions below to be considered the record, joint appendix, or something else if cited in the brief?
A: Cite like the record.
Q8: Is there any way to get a copy (preferably electronic) of last year’s winning brief?
A: No. Sorry
Q9: When writing the cover page, what term is it for the Supreme Court (October 2008)?
A: 2009-2010 Term
Q10: Regarding the sections of the brief, what should be in the “Opinions Below” section? Our briefs have never contained this section, and if this refers to procedural history we usually put that in the Statement of the Case section.
A: Procedural History
Q11: One of our team members had a quick question about citations to the record in the Spong brief: can competitors use “id” when citing to the record? Or would you prefer the full citation and not “id”?
A: You can use Id. to refer to the record.
Q12: How will argument sides be determined after the first round?
A: Higher ranked competitor will argue on brief for the quarterfinals, then a coin-toss will be used for the semi-finals and finals (winner of coin-toss will select side).
Q13: Our team was wondering whether the judges will expect an extensive discussion of Rule 41(e)(2)(B)? The Supreme Court adopted the amendments on March 26, 2009. The rules did not go into effect until December 2009.
A: This amendment was not included in the Judge’s bench brief. However, Judges have discretion to ask any questions they feel appropriate.
Q14: Is it permissible for a judge/coach to suggest that the advocates on a team reorder their presentation of issues?
A: Judges/coaches may suggest that the advocates reorder their issues; however, may not tell them how to do it.