A Fordham Law-educated immigration attorney and a New York City playwright shared their experiences with immigration reform, family unity, and immigration policy with the Stein Scholars on September 16. The Stein Scholars and the National Lawyer’s Guild co-sponsored the event.
The panel, featuring Bronx Defenders attorney Michelle Gonzalez ’14 and playwright Jessica Carmona, convened hours before the second GOP debate. GOP frontrunner Donald Trump’s recent comments on immigration—namely, his remarks likening Mexicans to criminals and his desire to deport 11 million undocumented immigrants—played a role in the panel’s topic selection, Stein Scholar Lorena Mejia ’17 said.
“Who’s standing up for immigrants and undocumented immigrants?” she asked the audience before introducing the panelists. “I’d say lawyers and people’s lawyers.”
Gonzalez is one such lawyer. The Stein Scholar alumnus provides plea consultation for low-income clients and removal defense in immigration court.
The people Gonzalez represents often share a commonality: a desire to escape poverty in their home countries. In doing so, they risk their freedom in the United States. President Obama has recognized the disproportionate number of African-American and Latinos in the justice system but supports deportations for felony convictions.
“Those two things are not mutually exclusive,” Gonzalez said.
As of 2015, the Obama administration had deported more than two million unauthorized immigrants, a number comparable to his predecessor, George W. Bush.
One of Bush’s deportees, Elvira Arellano, served as the focus of Jessica Carmona’s recent play Elvira: The Immigration Play, an official selection of the 2015 New York International Fringe Festival. The play details the story of Arellano, a Mexican citizen arrested in 2002 for using a fake Social Security number to work in the United States.
“She said, ‘No, I have a right to be here,’” Carmona told the audience of Arellano’s response to impending deportation. Arellano and her young son took sanctuary in a Chicago area church before she was deported in 2007.
People like Arellano come to America, ironically, because U.S. agribusiness giants like Monsanto flood the market with corn and grain, thus leading to mass job losses, Carmona explained. The play addresses such issues while alluding to John Steinbeck’s classic novel The Grapes of Wrath.
Earlier in the evening, Rodrigo Bacus ’16, an executive board member of the National Lawyer’s Guild, recounted his experience in the Philippines this summer as a people’s lawyer, and reminded his classmates they do not need to make a distinction between being a lawyer and an activist. Much of the Philippines’ population feels disconnected from the system, he reported, making activism, such as mobilizing people for a cause, more important than lawyering in the courtroom.
Rosemary* dated her husband for a decade before the couple, both natives of Crown Heights, Brooklyn, decided to finally tie the knot in 2003.
Their marriage was much shorter, though.
By the time they married, they’d already had two children, and a third arrived not long after their wedding. It was bad enough that Rosemary’s husband did not take care of the children, made her quit every job she took on, and refused to let her take classes or have friendships or wear short skirts. But he also signed up for numerous credits cards and plunged the couple into debt.
The final straw came when he fathered a child outside of the marriage—even as he was accusing Rosemary of infidelity and verbally abusing her.
In 2009, they separated. For Rosemary, divorce was too costly to undertake. So she turned, as many in New York City do, to the Sanctuary for Families’ Center for Battered Women’s Legal Services, for a no contest divorce.
Each year Fordham Law sends five teams of students to the center to interview clients, such as Rosemary, and help them submit critical documents to court, as part of the Uncontested Divorce Project.
It’s the kind of messy, unpredictable, face-to-face work with clients that students might expect to deal with upon graduation, said Yi-jen Chang, deputy director of the matrimonial and economic justice project at Sanctuary for Families.
“In the training, we emphasize the complex need of a person. They may call us for a divorce, but at the time, an order of protection might be the first priority, or shelter might be the first priority,” she said.
“When I talk about interviewing a battered victim or a survivor, [students]have to pay really close attention. Survivors may not remember things because it’s too traumatizing to remember, or they may minimize things.”
Sanctuary for Families works in all five boroughs, and as such, Chang said the clients hail from a wide array of backgrounds.
“We have Chinese clients who suffer severe physical violence from their very religious or seemingly docile partners; we have a client whose husband is in the Russian mafia. They could be a professor, a diplomat, a taxi driver, or could operate a takeout Chinese restaurant,” she said.
Sasha Fisher
Sasha Fisher, a third-year law student who’s coordinated the Uncontested Divorce Project for the past two years, got a taste of how messy things can get outside of the classroom when, in her first year, she and a partner were tasked with working with a woman whose husband of three years had become violent. After meeting with the students twice, the woman changed her mind and opted not to get a divorce.
Fisher, a 2013 Fordham College at Rose Hill graduate from San Francisco, said she was discouraged at first that the work they’d done was for naught, but has since realized it was a very valuable lesson nonetheless.
“I think this is an experience that a lot of lawyers have. You put in that work, and you work as hard as you can for every client, even if the outcome is not what you initially think it will be,” she said.
“It was also a very valuable lesson in client autonomy, which is something that I believe very strongly in. Our clients are adults, and they can make those decisions for themselves.”
Fisher credits two classes she took with sociology professor Jeanne Flavin, PhD, on the U.S. prison system, and gender crime and criminal justice, for spurring her interest in family and criminal law. She is now interviewing for positions in the public defender’s office.
The DVAC is one of 24 student clubs under the auspices of the Law School’s Public Interest Resource Center. Fisher said she was drawn to it because of the opportunity to work directly with clients.
For Katherine Wentworth-Ping, a first-year student, involvement with the center is a family affair of sorts. Her husband volunteered there when he attended Fordham Law, and, when she was an undergraduate, her older sister inspired her to work with refugees and asylum seekers who’d survived domestic violence.
The first year of law school can be very inward oriented, she said, with much emphasis on classwork, so volunteering is a nice break.
“It’s great to actually get outside of that 1L mindset and recalibrate to all the different parts of the profession, and this happens to be a very gratifying part of it, really helping someone in need,” she said.
Tom Schoenherr, Assistant Dean of Public Interest Resource Center, said the DVAC was the first student group formed when the Public Interest Resource was created 22 years ago. The partnership with Sanctuary for Families began in 1997.
“Year after year, we find anywhere from a quarter to a third of the entire student body who are willing to dedicate additional time to a volunteer project. They’re not getting academic credit; they’re not getting any money,” he said.
“They feel that whatever project they choose to affiliate with is a very important thing to be involved with even during law school, which is very busy.”
The feeling is often mutual, Chang said.
“A client told me, ‘I can truly use the word ‘compassionate’ to describe the students. They really want to listen, to get to know me and to know my story,’” she said.
“When a divorce is final, and a client cries, and says ‘Thank you, thank you” 10 times in a row . . ., that’s a moment that I cherish.”
The Brendan Moore Trial Advocacy Center at Fordham Law School hosted 18 law schools from across the United States during its fifth annual Judge Paul Joseph Kelly, Jr. Invitational Trial Competition earlier this month.
Judge Kelly ’67, who sits on the U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, presided over the finals in which Brooklyn defeated Georgetown on November 15 inside the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The University of Missouri-Kansas City and Quinnipiac were semifinalists.
The two-day competition featured Fordham Law alumni and students in a variety of roles, from judges and evaluators to witnesses and bailiffs. Greg SanGermano ’02 drafted the trial problem, involving the death of a wealthy, aging Hollywood star. The prosecution claimed that the deceased’s son murdered him by spiking his drink with a lethal amount of oxycodone. The defense argued that the possibilities of suicide or accidental overdose established reasonable doubt.
“It was a really great learning experience for our students to be witnesses undergoing direct and cross examination and to see top-notch schools compete,” said Adam Shlahet ’02, Director of Trial Advocacy Competitions for the Brendan Moore Trial Advocates.
“It was a big spotlight, and I think we did well,” added Competition Editor Courtney Kane ’16, who served in that capacity with Sheila Shen ’16. “We’re very happy with the outcome. It was a good way to end the fall semester of our trial ad program.”
The competition has emerged as one of the country’s finest, with more schools expressing interest in competing each year, Shlahet noted. This is in part due to strong student participation. Sixty-six students, featuring Brendan Moore Advocates and a small number of 1Ls, served as witnesses and bailiffs.
“It’s a testament to how strong our Law School is that we could have so many students come in on a Saturday morning to serve as witnesses and bailiffs,” Shlahet added.
Judge Kelly’s involvement also added to the event’s prestige. Trying a case before a federal judge with his experience “would be an honor for a practicing attorney let alone a law student,” Shlahet said.
Shlahet and Kane also credited the participation of Fordham Law Professor and Brendan Moore Chair in Advocacy James L. Kainen, Adjunct Professors Kenneth Montgomery ’97 and Joseph Cordaro ’03 as semifinal judges, Katherine Parker ’92 of Proskauer Rose, Harriet Newman Cohen of Cohen Rabin Stein Schumann and John Uretsky ’99 as final round evaluators, and Brendan Moore’s 11 board members.
The Fordham Moot Court team captured the regional championship and all the other prizes in the National Moot Court Competition, the country’s premier moot court event, on November 19.
Team members included Amanda Meinhold, who served as captain, Kimberly R. Greer, who won Best Oralist, and Emily Anne Vance, who won Second Best Oralist. The Fordham team received the Best Brief award with a score of 97 out of 100. The team was coached by Andrea Chidyllo, Editor-in-Chief of the Moot Court Board, and Professor Maria L. Marcus.
“The team’s professionalism was striking as they faced difficult, cutting-edge issues,” said Marcus. “At each stage, they continued researching and rethinking their arguments in order to perfect them.”
In a competition that attracts hundreds of teams nationwide, the regional winners advance to the national championship rounds in February. The competition is sponsored by and held at the Association of the Bar of the City of New York.
The issues involved 1) defining a tipper’s personal benefit and a tippee’s knowledge in insider trading cases and 2) whether exculpatory testimony given in a grand jury proceeding is admissible in a subsequent criminal trial if the witness is unavailable to testify.
Three Fordham Law students took first place overall last month in one of the most realistic arbitration competitions in the country and the first of its kind in the State of New York.
Alessandra Rose Johnson ’17, Alexandra Thomas ’17, and Kaitlyn Zacharias ’17 of the Dispute Resolution Society won the First Annual New York State Arbitration Competition, a new domestic arbitration competition started this year by the NYSBA Dispute Resolution Section. For the competition, contestants received a fact pattern based on a commercial dispute for which they drafted a pre-hearing memorandum, prepared witnesses, and conducted an arbitration hearing under the AAA rules, including opening and closing statements as well as direct and cross examinations.
On the weekend of November 13 and 14, Johnson, Thomas, and Zacharias arbitrated before practicing arbitrators, including in the final round Judge E. Leo Milonas, former Associate Justice of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department; John Feerick ’61, former president of the AAA and former Dean of Fordham Law School; and Claire Gutekunst, President-Elect of the NYSBA. As winners, they received a cash prize and gained feedback from leading practitioners in the field. The team was coached by Stefanie Arroyo ’17.
Fordham Law Professor Robin Lenhardt received the Constance Baker Motley Award and Stein Scholar Derick Dailey ’17 was selected regional chair-elect during the 2016 Northeast Black Law Students Association Regional Convention.
The annual convention, held this year in Elizabeth, New Jersey, brought together students, professors, alumni, and administrators from law schools across an eight-state region.
Dailey, the convention coordinator, presented Lenhardt the award named after Motley, the late civil rights activist, lawyer, federal judge, New York state senator, and Manhattan borough president.
“The idea that any of the work I am doing in class with students or outside, in terms of scholarship or with the center, reflects any of the principles she advocated means a great deal,” said Lenhardt, the director of the Fordham Center on Race, Law and Justice that launches February 29.
Lenhardt also moderated a panel titled “Race Matters: Law Schools and Diversity” featuring administrators from law schools across the Northeast, including Fordham Assistant Dean of Student Affairs Nitza Escalera. Lenhardt credited Dailey for having the vision to make the panel happen.
“The panel confirmed for me that this dialogue Dean Matthew Diller has invited the Fordham community to engage in is really important,” Escalera said, noting this was not true at all law schools across the region.
Participating in the panel and hearing student feedback about their law school experiences reminded Lenhardt that, while much progress has been made since the days of Motley and Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, greater strides are needed to ensure students have “the tools necessary to address issues of race in their communities and the legal context overall.”
She expressed confidence that the new center she is leading, in collaboration with associate center directors and acclaimed race scholars Professors Tanya Hernandez and Kimani Paul-Emile, would provide such tools to the Law School’s students.
One of those students is Dailey, who chose to attend Fordham Law because of its religious- and service-oriented ethos. Dailey received his MA in black religion in the African diaspora and ethics from Yale University.
Dailey served on the executive board for the Northeast region of BLSA for the 2015-16 calendar year. As regional chair for 2016-17, he aims to offer support to chapter leaders across the region, establish new partnerships for BLSA, and lead with integrity and confidence that motivates others to do more on issues of race and social justice.
“It’s a significant honor that comes with a tremendous amount of responsibility to lead,” Dailey said, adding he was “extremely humbled.”
He credited Professors Sheila Foster, Bruce Green, Russell Pearce, and Lenhardt for the mentorship and wisdom they have shared with him.
“I made the best choice I could have made,” Dailey said of law school. “Fordham has been exceptional, not just in terms of academic instruction but also professional guidance.”
Lenhardt called Dailey a person of “great talent, capacity, and potential” as a national and regional leader on issues of race and social justice.
“I think he will be able to very eloquently and persuasively offer leadership on that front,” Lenhardt said, adding he is also a leader at Fordham Law.
Fordham Law School’s Brendan Moore Advocates won the National Civil Mock Trial competition at Florida State University Law School on February 28, thanks to a commanding grasp of evidence and strong use of and response to objections.
The victorious 3L team comprised of Eilis Meagher, David O’Brien, John-Christopher Record, and Marissa Steiner took home a $2,000 prize that will defray costs of future competitions. Judges named Meagher the three-day competition’s best advocate.
“We all put so much work in over the semester,” Meagher said of the almost two months spent practicing direct- and cross-examinations, opening and closing arguments, and substantive legal motions for the competition. “So to win our last competition with the Brendan Moores felt amazing.”
The team shared an unyielding belief in one another, Meagher noted, a critical element since only two team members participated as plaintiff’s or defendant’s lawyers in each trial round. Fordham Law defeated Louisiana State University Law School in Sunday’s final.
This past weekend’s victory highlights a strong start to the spring trial advocacy season for the Brendan Moore Advocates. This includes a “final four” appearance at the Capitol City Challenge Mock Trial Competition sponsored by American University’s Washington College of Law and a semifinal appearance at the New York Region of the National Trial Competition sponsored by the Texas Young Lawyers Association and the American College of Trial Lawyers.
“At the end of the day, success in this program is not about victories,” said Professor James Kainen, the Brendan Moore Chair in Advocacy. “The real success of this program is in what students learn, but of course it’s wonderful to see their efforts rewarded.”
This knowledge includes how to properly try cases in an ethical, substantive, and persuasive manner and how to make the most of the evidence you possess.
Brendan Moore Advocates receive practical, real-world experience in fundamentals, such as asking close-ended questions during cross-examinations, and learn how to remain calm when facing adversity in the courtroom, noted Deborah Wassel ’10, who served as co-coach with Natalie Smith ’12 of the winning civil mock trial team.
“I can’t imagine going into real trial work without that preparation,” said Wassel, who serves as a Queens County Assistant District Attorney.
Meagher, who plans to work at a law firm in Connecticut after graduation, credited the Brendan Moore Advocates for enhancing her advocacy skills, particularly her ability to evaluate factual inferences, as well as enhancing her understanding of evidence and litigation.
While Meagher and her team competed in Tallahassee, Florida, this weekend, a separate quartet of Fordham 3Ls competed in Washington, D.C.
The 3L team of Matthew Bruno, Katherine Demartini, Yashwanth Manjunath, and Colleen Powers advanced to the semifinal round of the Capitol City Challenge Mock Trial Competition out of a 24-team field. Jonathan Macri ’10 and Fawn Lee ’14 coached the team.
One month earlier, the 3L team of Robert Iodice and Daniel Rosenblum advanced to the semifinals in the New York Region of the National Trial Competition. Judges named Rosenblum the third-best summation during the preliminary rounds out of 54 delivered. Adam Shlahet ’02, Director of Trial Advocacy Competitions for the Brendan Moore Advocates, and Jeffrey Briem ’05 coached the students.
Yashwanth Manjunath, Katherine Demartini, Colleen Powers, co-coach Fawn Lee ’14, and Matthew Bruno
Fordham Law School placed fourth out of 158 competing teams in the 66th annual National Moot Court Competition, the country’s premier moot court event held last month at the New York City Bar.
The 3L team consisting of captain Amanda Meinhold, Kimberly R. Greer, and Emily Anne Vance advanced to the national semifinals three months after winning the regional championship. At regionals, the team swept all the major awards: Best Brief, Best Oralist (Greer), and Second Best Oralist (Vance).
A challenging brief writing regimen, twice daily moot preparations, and a strong camaraderie resulted in the team’s success at nationals on February 12, said Professor Maria L. Marcus, moderator for Fordham Law School’s interschool moot court teams and the Joseph M. McLaughlin Professor of Law Emeritus.
“This team was very, very teachable,” Marcus said. “They didn’t mind being together constantly, every day and every weekend, and they kept learning.”
Moot Court is the only Law School student organization that requires brief writing, Marcus said. As a result, team members learn that a good brief tells a well-researched story rather just listing arguments.
“This is a great advantage when team members get litigation-related jobs after graduation, as they have already spent months organizing and writing briefs—a major demand of law firms,” the professor noted.
After writing and filing a brief, the team mooted twice per day for weeks. Each session lasted up to two-and-a-half hours, with Marcus, other professors, Moot Court Board members, alumni, and federal and state judges questioning the team. This process bred not only excellence but versatility, Marcus said.
The competition required teams to present the best argument for each side of a given case on how the Supreme Court should resolve the controversy before them. The two issues involved defining a tipper’s personal benefit and a tippee’s knowledge in insider trading cases and whether exculpatory testimony given in a grand jury proceeding is admissible in a subsequent criminal trial if the witness is unavailable to testify.
The National Black Law Students Association elected Derick Dailey ’17 as its national chair-elect earlier this month at its annual convention in Baltimore, making him the first Fordham Law student to hold the prominent position.
Dailey’s national election on March 12 came one month after the Northeast chapter schools of BLSA, or NEBLSA, elected him regional chair-elect over its eight states. With the blessing and encouragement of his regional presidents and Fordham Law Dean Matthew Diller, Dailey organized a campaign team for the national seat.
As national chair for 2016–17, Dailey will act as executive director of NBLSA, a 48-year-old student-run, nonprofit organization boasting 200 local chapters and tens of thousands of students, alumni, professors, administrators, and corporate sponsors. He will also act as chairman of NBLSA’s board of directors.
“I’m excited about the opportunity to reshape the brand of NBLSA nationally and globally into one focused squarely on racial justice,” Dailey said, noting he seeks to move the organization’s legacy forward rather than keep it intact. “It’s a job I’m honored to have and a really humbling experience.”
Dailey hopes to leverage NBLSA’s collective intellect and resources to significantly impact distressed communities of color by working to confront and remedy community challenges and engage stakeholders in conversations about economic and gender equality, as well as racial and criminal justice.,
His mission also includes strengthening relationships with partners such as the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and the National Urban League, raising more capital so NBLSA can increase its activity, and being accessible and accountable to his advisory board, whether through in-person communication at retreats and conventions or via web-based methods.
Dailey sees Fordham Law’s new Center on Race, Law & Justice, his election as national chair of NBLSA, and the ongoing national discussion about issues of racial justice as the University’s “kairos” moment—an ancient Greek word describing a great convergence of time, space, people, and ideas. He praised Diller, whom he met with prior to seeking the national chair, as a “champion” on racial justice and the law.
“Fordham Law School is positioned well to be a national leader when it comes to racial justice, whether through legal scholarship, student leadership, or leadership and training for faculty and staff,” Dailey said.
Dailey is just the second national chair to hail from NEBLSA over the past 15 years. Kendra Brown of Vermont Law School served as national chair in 2012–13.
The Brendan Moore Trial Advocates continued their stellar spring, placing two teams, including a finalist, among the top four at a recent trial advocacy competition in Brooklyn and another team as a semifinalist in an ethics trial competition in California.
Fordham Law finished with two teams in the “final four” among the 16-team American Association for Justice’s Regional Trial Advocacy Competition on March 13 in Brooklyn. Such a feat has only happened three or four times over the past two decades, noted Brendan Moore Chair in Advocacy James Kainen, adding the Moores enter more than one team in a maximum of three competitions each year.
Coached by Moore alumni Brittany Russell ’13 and Michael Hardin ’14, the 2L team of Marjorie Dugan, Brianna Gallo, Claire Huynh, and Alexandra Oliver advanced to the Brooklyn competition’s final round. Meanwhile, the 2L team of Vinh Hua, Anthony Odorisi, Kate Ross, and Edia Uko advanced to the semifinal round in the same competition. Moore alumni Cheryl Thill ’07 and Mike Higgins ’08 coached them.
Brendan Moore Advocates also reached the semifinals of the National Ethics Trial Competition sponsored by the University of Pacific’s McGeorge School of Law on March 17–19. The 2L team of Devavrat Chaudhary, Anthony Freeman, Gabriel Reale, and Jose Santana emerged from the preliminary rounds with a perfect record and the top seed among the 22 competing teams. Reza Rezvani and Brendan Moore alumnus Rishi Gupta ’13 coached the team.
“My experience on the ethics team this semester was truly something special. Few times in my life have I felt so proud to have been part of something,” said Santana. “I can honestly say that my trial advocacy experience this semester was one of the most rewarding and just plain fun experiences I have had.”
The team’s recent successes in Brooklyn and California follow other impressive spring 2016 results including a first-place finish at the National Civil Mock Trial Competition at Florida State University College of Law; a “final four” appearance at Capitol City Challenge Mock Trial at American University’s Washington College of Law; and a semifinal performance at the New York Region Trial Competition sponsored by Texas Young Lawyers Association and the American College of Trial Lawyers.
“The bottom line is it’s a fabulous program and everything is working,” Kainen said, crediting the participating students for their hard work and thorough preparation.
The Brendan Moore Advocates will next compete in the 14-team Estrella Trial Advocacy Competition in San Juan on April 9–10. Co-sponsored by George Washington University School of Law, the event is the only federal civil mock trial event in Puerto Rico.
The Moores will also compete in the intraschool William M. Tendy Federal Criminal Trial Advocacy Competition in April. The 12-team event, comprised of 24 Fordham Law students, will hold its final at 6 p.m. on April 11 in Fordham Law’s Gorman Moot Courtroom.
Fordham Law’s Dispute Resolution Society will seek to continue its impressive spring with a strong showing next week at the ABA National Mediation Competition in New York City.
The 2L team of Elizabeth Perez and Emily Safko will compete in nationals after winning an all-Fordham final at the ABA Regional Mediation Competition on February 27 in Quinnipiac, Connecticut. Fellow 2L team Rachel Orbach and Katey Peardon finished second. 3L Denise Arana coached both teams.
Also this spring, the Dispute Resolution Society advanced to the elimination rounds of competitions in Chicago, Paris, and Hong Kong, and hosted 100 arbitrators and more than 225 students to practice for the Willem C. Vis International Commercial Arbitration Moot.
These successes are due, in large part, to the work of Fordham Law Professor Jacqueline Nolan-Haley and past competitors who volunteer their time as 3Ls to coach and support the team’s 2L competitors, said 3L Cora Walker, chair of the society.
“Both domestically and internationally, more clients are turning to mediation, negotiation, and arbitration as alternatives to the traditional court systems to resolve disputes,” Walker said. “Fordham’s Dispute Resolution Society is teaching students the skills they need to be successful in this growing field.”
These skills include the ability to negotiate effectively and be a successful advocate for clients whether in mediation, where a business or personal relationship might be key, or in an arbitration setting, where the existing contractual relationship has failed, Walker added.
The Dispute Resolution Society also enjoyed twin successes this spring at the International Academy of Dispute Resolution’s International Law School Competition in Chicago. Both teams reached the semifinals and the School also claimed fifth-best team mediator.
Internationally, Fordham advanced to the eighth-finals at the ICC International Mediation Competition in Paris, beating 50 of the 66 teams, and the round of 32 at the Willem C. Vis International Commercial Arbitration Moot in Hong Kong in March, beating over 80 teams and winning an Honorable Mention for Best Claimants Brief.
On February 20–21, the Dispute Resolution Society, led by co-editors Rima Pancholi and Allison Silverman, hosted the Tenth Annual Fordham Vis Pre-Moot. Teams from 43 universities, including competitors from Japan and Switzerland, came to Fordham to hone advocacy skills and refine arguments in preparation for the Willem C. Vis International Commercial Arbitration Moot.
A lively discussion about the future of the multibillion dollar daily fantasy sports industry in New York and beyond served as one of the highlights of the 20th annual Fordham Sports Law Symposium, hosted by the Fordham Sports Law Forum, on April 1.
Daily fantasy sports giants DraftKings and FanDuel, which collectively account for 90 percent of industry revenues, have temporarily ceased operations in New York while state legislators decide whether the games are based on skill or chance, in accordance with state gambling laws. Daily fantasy’s legal quagmire could lead to a New York state constitutional amendment on gambling and future regulation and taxation of the contests, panelists said.
The symposium also featured panels on persistent gender inequality in sports and recent challenges to the arbitration process in professional sports. Fordham Clinical Law Professor Paul Radvany moderated the arbitration panel.
The daily fantasy sports industry has exploded in popularity in the past two years, with hundreds of millions spent on advertising and massive investment from private equity firms, professional sports leagues, and major media outlets.
Increased visibility and value have resulted in increased scrutiny, notably in New York where Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has equated the contests to gambling, in violation of state law.
Now the issue in New York, as in many other states, rests with the state legislature. If the state does not legalize the contests by June 30, daily fantasy operators will need to wait for a court to rule on appeals of injunctions against them.
The question of whether a “material element of chance” exists in the games makes it unlikely the legislature will resolve the issue without a court decision, said Fordham Law Adjunct Professor Marc Edelman, who also serves as associate professor of law at Baruch College’s Zicklin School of Business and is a frequent media commentator on daily fantasy sports.
“Everybody wants to get to the same place: to allow New Yorkers to play the daily fantasy sports they love to play,” added Jeremy Kudon, a partner with Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe and daily fantasy sports lobbyist.
That path, as Edelman alluded, might not be so cut and dried.
Even if a bill passes before June 30, that might not be enough to legalize daily fantasy sports in New York.
Panelist Daniel Wallach, a shareholder with Becker & Poliakoff, suggested that, before any daily fantasy sports legislation can take effect, a voter referendum may be required under Article 1, Section 9 of the New York Constitution, the provision that prohibits all forms of gambling unless specifically exempted. That prompted sharp debate among the panelists about whether the anti-gambling provisions of the state constitution applied to daily fantasy sports and whether legislators were free to characterize daily fantasy sports as not ‘gambling.’
“Ultimately, the whole daily fantasy sports industry, particularly in New York, is going to be regulated and taxed,” predicted Irwin Kishner, partner with Herrick Feinstein.
Daily fantasy operators could face challenges in other states, panelists said, pointing to DraftKings’ single NASCAR and golf offerings as potential problem areas.
A federal criminal court indictment related to daily fantasy sports is not out of the question, said Daniel Wallach, a shareholder of Becker & Poliakoff, noting such an action could take place in Florida before year’s end. That state bans wagers on contests of skill or chance.
Data Game
Prior to the fantasy sports panel, Hershman shared insights into another rapidly evolving field: entertainment programming.
Today’s original dramas and comedies on Netflix, Amazon, and other streaming sites arise from data collected on viewers’ habits, Hershman said.
Depending on how it’s used, this information can be successful or not in creating new content, as Hershman illustrated with a side-by-side comparison of recent Amazon and Netflix political shows.
Amazon used data from eight TV pilots to create a marginally popular political satire called “Alpha House.” Netflix used its data, instead, to provide people a choice of what they wanted to watch. The show that resulted from Netflix’s experiment became the Emmy Award-winning “House of Cards.”
Data is also “all-encompassing” in sports, Hershman noted, pointing to its use in rating players and measuring ticket and beer sales.
Even in sports, data is not foolproof, Hershman said, highlighting his beloved New York Jets’ decision to pass on a future Hall of Fame quarterback in the 1983 draft.
“At the end of the day, you want to draft Dan Marino over Ken O’Brien,” Hershman said, referring to the Jets’ oft-criticized decision to pick O’Brien two spots before the Miami Dolphins selected Marino. “Don’t forget about the most important equation: the human part.”
The National Football League’s recent written demand that the New York Times retract an investigative piece alleging the multibillion dollar sports league used tobacco industry attorneys to hide sensitive concussion findings—or face legal action—came as little surprise to DeMaurice Smith, a man who is no stranger to NFL-related litigation.
“My first reaction was ‘Welcome to the club,’” said Smith, executive director of the NFL Players Association, during his morning keynote speech at the Fordham Sports Law Symposium, hosted by the Fordham Sports Law Forum, on April 1. “All of our fights with the NFL have resolved themselves or not resolved themselves in the courtroom,” he added.
Smith has served as NFLPA executive director for seven “incredibly challenging and rewarding” years, most notably helping to usher in a new collective bargaining agreement that ended the lockout prior to the 2011 season.
During his symposium address, Smith spoke with relish about his contentious relationship with NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, described the NFL as the “largest legal cartel in America,” and encouraged students and lawyers to consider the deeper meaning of events such as the NFL’s lawsuit threats against the New York Times.
The NFL’s response to the March 24 Times article titled “N.F.L.’s Flawed Concussion Research and Ties to Tobacco Industry” should raise societal questions about corporate cartel power, chilling free speech, and intimidation, Smith said.
“They don’t like to play the bigger game of what’s right and what’s best for everybody because they don’t have to,” Smith said of the NFL, noting a lack of federal and state oversight shields the league, which collected an estimated $12 billion in revenue in 2014, from accountability.
As an example of the NFL’s “cartel power,” Smith pointed to its attempt to restructure TV contracts prior to the 2011 season that would have netted it $4 billion, even if a lockout forced the season’s cancellation. The union sued over this proposal and a judge later ruled it unlawful, he noted.
More recently, the NFLPA protested league proposals that two personal fouls in one game would result in an automatic suspension. Such a proposal is not part of the collective bargaining agreement, Smith has reminded Goodell. It also raises questions about why players continue to stay in games when exhibiting concussion symptoms.
“Why is it so easy to come up with a two personal foul rule when it’s so hard for teams’ medical staffs to treat our players as people, as opposed to fungible commodities?” Smith said he asked Goodell.
Smith told the audience he “loves every minute” of his advocacy on behalf of NFL players, many of which center on the “esoteric idea of rights,” related not only to collective bargaining but also medical ethics and federal and state law.
There’s very little bandwidth for discussions among football fans of rights, moral responsibilities, and moral obligations, Smith acknowledged. Nor is there any other organization standing up for the rights of the players who power America’s most popular, and lucrative, sport; the NFLPA is it.
“We’re the union, baby, and we take our obligations seriously,” Smith said. “And while at the end of the day this job may kill me, it’s still the best job on the planet.”
During World War II, over 110,000 Japanese Americans—two-thirds of them U.S. citizens—were forcibly removed from their West Coast homes and detained in inland concentration camps, one of which was the Heart Mountain War Relocation Center in Wyoming. After the draft was reinstated for Japanese Americans, 3500 Nisei (children born in the United States to Japanese-born parents) were drafted in the first year, and many were assigned to the segregated 442nd Regimental Combat Team. Some at Heart Mountain refused to report for their pre-induction physical examinations to protest what they believed to be the denial of their rights as citizens. This refusal led to the arrest and trial of 63 young men for draft evasion as well as a trial of eight others for conspiracy to aid and abet the draft resisters.
On April 6 Fordham’s Asian Pacific American Law Students Association presented a program, “Heart Mountain: Conscience, Loyalty, and the Constitution,” to remember and learn from these trials. With Hon. Denny Chin ’78 and Professor Thomas H. Lee, APALSA reenacted two court cases that arose when the U.S. Armed Forces drafted Nisei from within the Heart Mountain camp.
The script for the event was based on the actual trial transcript and written by the Asian American Bar Association of New York, principally by Judge Chin and his wife, Kathy Hirata Chin. This marks the ninth program that they have written with the AABANY.
“We look for powerful stories about people and legal issues that are still relevant today,” said Judge Chin. “We try to introduce these cases to a new generation.”
In US v. Fujii (known as the Mass Trial) 63 Nisei detainees were placed on trial for failure to comply with the Selective Service Act. Stripped of their natural-born rights as American citizens within the camps, these Nisei had banded together to form the Heart Mountain Fair Play Committee, collectively resisting their conscription into a segregated Army unit until their civil rights were restored.
“How can you ask us to fight when our parents, our siblings, are forced to live behind barbed wire?” APALSA 1L representative Ehtesham Iqbal read as one of the Nisei. “We will serve our country, the only home we have ever known, in unsegregated units, when our rights as American citizens have been restored.”
After six days of trial, all 63 men were indicted on draft evasion charges and sentenced to federal prison.
In US v. Okamoto, dubbed the Conspiracy Trial, seven members of the Fair Play Committee and a journalist were charged with encouraging Nisei detainees to resist and protest their conscription into the armed forces. APALSA student co-social chair Daniel Chin read as FPC member Frank Emi, who had been arrested after trying to leave the camp: “I thought once I had been drafted, all of my rights as a U.S. citizen had been recognized and restored. Doesn’t that include the ability to move around freely?”
It did not; seven leaders of the FPC, including Emi, were indicted and sentenced to serve two- to four-year prisons sentences.
Professor Thomas H. Lee and Hon. Denny Chin ’78
Heart Mountain closed in November 10, 1945, but most of the convicted continued to serve out their sentences into 1946. On Christmas Eve 1947, President Harry Truman pardoned the resisters. While Service members of the 442nd combat unit were welcomed home as heroes, the resisters were regarded as traitors and cowards within the Japanese-American community. It was only years later that the resisters were finally recognized for their courage and conviction in standing up to the government to oppose the violation of their rights.
In addition to co-writing the script, Judge Chin participated in Wednesday’s reenactments and provided overall narration during the program. The reenactments were followed by a Q&A and a small concert featuring traditional koto player Kento Iwasaki and soprano Joy Tamayo.
Questions concerning race, inequality, and the law underscored a statement from Judge Chin regarding the relevancy of the proceedings. “Racially motivated policies and discriminatory practices are timely issues,” he said.
The Brendan Moore Trial Advocacy Program hosted its 6th annual William M. Tendy Federal Criminal Trial Competition, the group’s advanced intraschool mock trial competition, on April 10–11.
In the final round, Mike O’Leary and Stella Gilliland, students in the Advanced Trial Advocacy course taught by assistant U.S. attorneys Amanda Kramer and Tim Kasulis, competed against Brendan Moore Trial Advocates Daisy Sexton and Paul Skydel, who were coached by Brendan Moore alumni Ben Bergin and Jason Tortora. Sexton and Skydel, representing the defense, won, and Sexton received the Best Advocate award for her performance in the final round.
Competitors in the final round were evaluated and critiqued by a distinguished panel of attorneys including Michael Garcia, former U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York and current associate justice on the Court of Appeals; Robert Fiske, Jr. former U.S. attorney for the SDNY and Fordham-Stein Prize winner; Eugene Kaplan, former assistant U.S. attorney; William Tendy’s daughter Sheila Tendy of Tendy Law Office, LLC.; and Tendy’s granddaughter Krystyn Tendy, assistant district attorney for Kings County.
In the preliminary rounds, the award for Best Advocate went to Brendan Moore Trial Advocate Ted Becker, who was coached by Brendan Moore alumni Cassandra Rohme and David Mou.
Preliminary rounds took place at the Southern District of New York courthouse, located at 500 Pearl Street; semifinal and final rounds were held in the Law School’s moot court and trial advocacy courtrooms.
The Fordham chapter of the Native American Law Students Association (NALSA) will hold its launch event this Friday, April 22 with a community cleanup in celebration of Earth Day.
The Earth Day event is an opportunity to raise visibility for the new chapter while beautifying the city, said Matthew Williams, Fordham NALSA president and co-founder. Founded this spring, Fordham NALSA seeks to serve as “a cultural and academic support system for both Native law students and students interested in Native Law and the Native community,” according to its mission statement.
Students do not need to be Native American to participate, Williams said, noting Vice President Andrew Cota and Secretary Chris Lisiewski are not. All three Fordham NALSA founders are 1Ls.
“We welcome whomever decides to come,” Williams said of the Earth Day cleanup, noting he is actively trying to dispel the misconception “you need to be part of this community in order to appreciate it.” In his first year at Fordham Law, Williams said he has met only one other Fordham Law student who identifies as Native American.
Williams, a Chippewa tribe member who grew up outside Detroit, received his initial inspiration to start a NALSA chapter at Fordham while attending an academic enrichment program during orientation. Williams’s meetings with other incoming students of color not only helped him recognize their common ground as minorities in the legal community but also the need for a Native American voice in that conversation.
Encountering students wearing Native American headdresses as costumes on a Halloween boat cruise in the fall further fueled Williams’ desire to start the chapter. Having a national organization behind him would provide more legitimacy when he expressed concerns about offensive costumes, he said.
In late January, Williams and his fellow founders received confirmation from the Office of Student Affairs that their bylaws and mission statement were accepted. Now, their focus is on administrative matters, such as being added to the Law School’s website, recruiting first-year students, and hosting more events in the coming year.
“We have to make ourselves visible to prospective students,” Williams said. “That’s the first step to keeping things going.”
Students interested in the Earth Day cleanup are invited to meet at 4:30 p.m. on Friday in the first floor lobby to receive gloves and trash bags. Anyone interested in joining NALSA should send an email to the Fordham chapter with their name and email address.
Over spring break, 3L Stein Scholar Rodrigo Bacus stood on the verge of tears inside a maximum-security prison in the Philippines, listening to the oppressed lift their voices in a song celebrating freedom, hope, and justice. The political prisoners in Metro Manila had shared stories with Bacus and his classmates of their activism and tribulations, notably imprisonment without conviction. Now, in song, they revealed their spirit, undefeated.
“No matter how repressed they are, people continue to fight for change and a better life,” reflected Bacus, a Philippines native who organized the alternative spring break trip for Universal Justice, a student-run organization in Fordham Law’s Public Interest Resource Center.
Stein Scholars also organized service-oriented alternative spring break trips to Texas to advocate for asylum rights for women and children detained upon crossing the U.S.-Mexico border and New Orleans to aid in judicial bypass for reproductive rights of girls under the age of 18. Stein Scholars and PIRC members have sponsored alternative spring break trips for almost 30 years, reflecting the service-oriented ethos of the Law School.
Political Pressures
Last summer, Bacus discovered his native Philippines much the same as he left it 15 years prior, despite the political elite’s claims of progress. In some ways, the government used the law to exact more sanctions, he said.
His experience working with the National Union of People’s Lawyers (NUPL) convinced him a return trip with Universal Justice would be a worthwhile firsthand introduction for his classmates into contemporary human rights, how people’s lawyering works, and the role the law plays, for better or worse.
Bacus and eight Universal Justice members met with members of the NUPL and the urban-poor organization Kadamay, political prisoners, political candidates, and professors to examine two themes during their weeklong stay in the Philippines.
The first centered on how to protect human rights when Filipinos are worried about being an instrument of American military goals, as a result of the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement the two nations signed in 2014. The second dealt with how to defend these people when they come under attack for voicing concerns.
Understanding the issues Filipinos face required more than talking with them, Bacus noted. It required seeing firsthand the conditions of political prisoners or seeing the walls that a plastic recycling plant near Manila’s outskirts was forced to erect at its own expense.
Government officials claimed the walls were a flooding prevention measure, Bacus said. Local urban-poor leaders contested the walls were born of a bribe and designed to prevent outsiders from viewing plant conditions.
“It made me angry,” Bacus said, “but strengthened my resolve to address these things and to inspire as many people as possible to understand these conditions and address them in some form.”
The Universal Justice plans to continue to provide comparative legal analysis to Filipino lawyers to help address their concerns related to the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement, Bacus said. It also offers continued aid with claims regarding unjust prison conditions, he added.
Freezing in Texas
3L Stein Scholar Razeen Zaman and five of her classmates in the Immigration Advocacy Project traveled to the South Texas Family Residential Center in Dilley, Texas, with Feerick Center for Social Justice Executive Director Dora Galacatos and Bree Bernwanger, director of the Feerick Center’s New York Unaccompanied Immigrant Children and Immigrant Families Project. They participated as part of the CARA Family Detention Pro Bono Project.
From March 20–26, they helped many women prepare for their Credible Fear Interview, a requirement of U.S. immigration services for those who want to apply for asylum and are subject to expedited removal. If an asylum officer finds an individual to have a credible fear of persecution or torture, the officer refers her case to an immigration judge for a full hearing on the asylum claim.
News reports of immigration detention centers did not prepare Zaman for what she encountered at the STFRC, located 80 miles southwest of San Antonio. Outside the center, the white-hot Texas sun loomed high. Once inside, a gloom replaced the light.
“Although Judge Dolly Gee ruled last July that family detention violates the Flores settlement, Central American women and children are still being detained in full force without any sign that this incredibly inhumane policy is coming to an end,” Zaman said. “It was very disturbing to see firsthand the babies and mothers who were being detained.”
Volunteers were not allowed to inspect the detainees’ sleeping quarters, Zaman said, but they heard stories about women and children being held in cramped, very cold conditions (what the woman described as an hielera [icebox]) once they were picked up by Customs and Border Patrol and before being transferred to Dilley Detention Center. The women also said guards had berated them, encouraging them to choose voluntary departure. Zaman observed that many of the women and children were physically sick and had terrible stories of fleeing gang threats, rape, extortion, and more.
Zaman’s family detention center experience highlighted how more direct service help is needed in Texas and how important it is to have people on the policy side work to change immigration and asylum laws. Post graduation, she will continue the fight for immigrant rights.
“The goal is to end immigration detention,” Zaman said, noting that immigration detention is effectively incarceration. “It’s a terrible thing to re-traumatize people who have left their countries because of severe trauma. The United States should honor its principle of family unity by immediately ending family detention.”
Hard Work in the Big Easy
The lure of fresh seafood, live music, and a carefree atmosphere attracts hundreds of thousands of tourists to New Orleans on an annual basis. 3L Stein Scholar Hailey Flynn’s first visit, however, resulted from a desire to reform a darker, seldom discussed side of the Crescent City.
“The hostile environment toward abortion across the South, the targeted restrictions against abortion providers shuttering clinics, and the challenges that teens face in accessing essential health services in Louisiana piqued my interest,” she recalled. Flynn learned about the Louisiana Judicial Bypass Project when she met Elisabeth Hofmann, the Tulane University student in charge of the project in 2015, which motivated her to organize the trip.
Flynn and four other members of Fordham’s Law Students for Reproductive Justice spent a week at Tulane, where they learned the ins and outs of Louisiana’s parental consent laws and the steps required to get a judicial bypass order—enabling girls under the age of 18 to lawfully obtain an abortion. This process is daunting for girls who are unable to obtain parental consent because it is unsafe or impracticable, Flynn said, and increases the likelihood they will pursue clandestine alternatives to abortion or carry an unwanted child to term.
Flynn’s team spoke with clinic administrators about the challenges to accessing judicial bypass and abortion services in Louisiana and created a variety of documents reflecting a nuanced understanding of the judicial bypass law in Louisiana. These documents included training for hotline volunteers, a pamphlet to be distributed in clinics, a checklist of the judicial bypass process, a legal research memo, and a meme to direct web traffic to the LJBP website.
Part of the team’s mission, Flynn explained, was to facilitate the connection between clinics and attorneys providing representation to ensure girls in need of an abortion were not denied this right because they could not navigate the legal system.
“I felt proud of the work that we accomplished while we were in New Orleans and felt even more committed to ensuring that the ill-conceived parental consent laws do not block access to girls’ and adolescents’ fundamental right to abortion,” Flynn said.
After graduation, Flynn will be a Georgetown Women’s Law and Public Policy Fellow at HIPS in Washington, D.C., where she will advocate for sex workers’ rights and on harm reduction issues.
A trio of former New York state prison inmates shared their experiences in solitary confinement, their insight into their work as jailhouse lawyers, and their mission to help others both in and outside prison during an April 14 event co-sponsored by Fordham Law School’s Prisoners’ Rights Advocates and the Fordham chapter of the National Lawyers Guild.
Terrence “Brilliance” Slater, Johnnie Bunting Jr., and Craig Williams told stories of being put in solitary for helping other inmates with legal questions, eating the notorious dietary offering while in solitary, and their current desire to see solitary abolished.
“We are trying to use every aspect of the proverbial ax or hammer to chip away at the system,” said Slater, CEO of the Incarcerated Nation Corp, a nonprofit organization providing reentry services to former inmates leaving solitary confinement and returning to their families.
1Ls Frank Kearl, Deema Nagib, and Rachel Weiner organized the event titled “Due Process vs. Disciplinary Process: And the Campaign to End Solitary Confinement.” Nagib and Weiner moderated the discussion.
The panel came as New York Senate Bill S2659 waits in committee. The bill, sponsored by State Senator Bill Perkins, would restrict the use of segregated confinement and create alternative therapeutic and rehabilitative confinement options.
A short distance from the classroom where the panel occurred, a 6’ by 8’ replica cell, constructed by Kearl, greeted visitors as they exited the third floor elevators. Such cells hold tens of thousands of prisoners for 23 hours per day, often for non-violent offenses. An estimated one-third of inmates locked in solitary suffer from mental illness.
“The cell is beautiful,” remarked Slater of the model. “It gives individuals a peak at the things inmates have to endure for months, years.”
Slater estimated he spent six of his 10 years in prison in solitary confinement. He earned a reputation as a jailhouse lawyer willing to defend his fellow inmates. He helped two of his fellow inmates gain release, but in the process suffered beatings and extended stays in solitary confinement. He maintained his innocence throughout his imprisonment.
“We go in with honor, knowing what the outcome is going to be,” Slater said, referring to his steadfast belief he would come home and equip others with the knowledge to change their lives. He has since started a program for prisoners and young children to learn how to code, he noted.
Bunting and Slater discussed separate instances where they alleged guards at Attica Correctional Facility beat them for the sole reason that they had expressed a desire to study the law and use it to aid others. Both men spoke of developing their legal acumen to the point prison officials viewed them as a threat and where other inmates became interested in the law.
Bunting spent more than 25 years in prison after being incarcerated for second-degree murder as a 17-year-old. His final six years were spent in solitary, he told the audience, noting this required him to play mind games to remain sane.
Two side effects of becoming a jailhouse lawyer, Bunting shared, were that his mail often did not get to its intended recipient, notably his relatives or courts, and that he ended up numerous times on the seven-day restrictive diet known as “the loaf,” the infamous pound cake–sized piece of bread served with cabbage that often caused constipation. The loaf was so bad, panelists said, that it inspired sympathy among prisoners that led rival gang members to temporarily put aside blood feuds and share other food.
Bunting is now mentoring other young men. He sees his prison stint as “the foundation for something great.”
“I did all these years,” Bunting said. “If I can’t build something positive from all that, that means most of my life was for nothing. I can’t have my life be for nothing.”
Williams, who spent 9.5 years incarcerated, also came home with the goal of rectifying previous wrongs. He has developed the nonprofit Photo Patch Foundation, which helps children upload photos to a website free of charge for their imprisoned parents to see. In addition, he speaks publicly against solitary confinement for those prisoners inside who lack a voice.
Fordham Law alumnus Adam Shlahet ’02 and the Brendan Moore Advocates have good reason to be excited for the future of Fordham’s mock trial program, and it’s not just due to the team’s standout performance in competitions. Fordham Law recently announced plans to expand the Brendan Moore Trial Advocacy Center, including the appointment of Shlahet as the center’s new director.
Shlahet, whose new role will begin in July 2016, currently serves as a special assistant attorney general in the Office of the Attorney General of the State of New York. He has served as an adjunct professor at Fordham Law since 2004 and as the School’s director of trial competitions. Last year Shlahet received the first Edward D. Ohlbaum Award from the Center for Excellence in Advocacy, which recognizes “a trial team coach and program director whose life and practice display sterling character and unquestioned integrity, coupled with ongoing dedication to the highest standards of the legal profession and the rule of law.” Shlahet will join James L. Kainen, who holds the Brendan Moore Chair in Advocacy, to provide leadership at the center.
“The expansion of our Brendan Moore Trial Advocacy Center is critical at a time when law schools need to do more to provide practical trial training for law students,” said Fordham Law Dean Matthew Diller. “Training not only entails hands-on learning about the trial process, fact analysis, opening statements, and cross examinations. Through programs and competitions at the center, Fordham Law students develop a deep sense of committed advocacy for their future clients, which is an important attribute that complements being supremely competent in the courtroom.”
“I have seen firsthand the benefits that our law students receive by taking part in the trial advocacy center’s competitions and training,” said Shlahet. “I look forward to continuing the important work of ensuring the Law School produces top-notch trial attorneys.”
In addition to the teams and training, the Brendan Moore Trial Advocacy Center holds symposia that bring trial lawyers to the School and offers a place for students to form legal teams and practice trial lawyering with law experts as their coaches.
An endowed clinical faculty position focused on trial advocacy also will be added at Fordham Law in the 2019-20 academic year. The School’s clinical program provides students with a wide range of opportunities to serve real clients who are facing real legal challenges and provides skills education through simulation courses in subjects as critical as counseling, negotiation, advocacy and trial skills. This new faculty position recognizes the importance of trial advocacy to Fordham Law’s approach to legal education.
Fordham Law School established the Brendan Moore Advocacy Center and the Brendan Moore Advocates Program to foster the teaching and study of lawyers as advocates at the trial level. Through the program, Fordham Law’s second, third, and fourth year students participate in trial competitions, both civil and criminal, and they have regularly won national, regional, and local competitions. They compete in approximately 18 competitions every year throughout the country, and Fordham Law’s trial advocacy program was recently ranked 16th in the nation by U.S. News & World Report. The center was originally made possible through the generosity of Thomas A. Moore ’72 and Judith Livingston Moore in memory of Tom’s brother Brendan Moore. The Moores also established the Brendan Moore Chair in Advocacy.
The New York City Trial Lawyers Alliance recognized three Fordham Law students for their outstanding achievements at the American Association for Justice Trial Advocacy Competition held in March.
The three recipients of the NYCTLA Trial Advocacy Award—Brianna Gallo, Marjorie (Jorie) Dugan, and Claire Huynh—were awarded a $2,500 prize. This is the first year that the NYCTLA has sponsored such an award, and the alliance hopes it will encourage talented students to continue in their career as trial lawyers. In addition to the prize and recognition, the students are invited to attend the NYCTLA Gala in October.
“The AAJ competition was challenging and fun. Each time we made it through to the next round, I couldn’t believe it!” Dugan said. “I was proud to be competing for Fordham Law and the Brendan Moore Trial Advocates; they had given me that ability to walk into a courtroom feeling ready for anything that would come our way because I had confidence in our preparation and ability as trial advocates.”
The three 2L students were members of a four-person team that included Alex Oliver, a 3L law student. The team advanced to the final round during the three-day AAJ competition, and after competing against 16 other schools, they received second place.
Gallo, Dugan, and Huynh were selected to receive the NYCTLA award by members of the Brendan Moore Trial Advocacy Center, who felt the award would be most beneficial for students in the earlier stages of their career.
“It’s really nice that the NYCTLA has recognized the accomplishments of the Brendan Moore Trial Advocacy program at Fordham and given us the opportunity to honor students specifically for their hard work,” said Professor James Kainen, Brendan Moore Chair in Advocacy.
“It was amazing, in and of itself, to be a finalist in the AAJ competition, but to have Fordham and the NYCTLA recognize the hard work we put into preparing for this competition really inspires me to continue working hard and to compete in future semesters,” Gallo added.
In preparation for the competition, the students worked with coaches Brittany Russell and Mike Hardin, both of whom are adjunct professors of trial advocacy. The competition involved a civil case regarding whether or not a bar was responsible for a drunk driving accident. Russell assisted the team largely with case theory as well as direct and cross examinations, and closing and opening statements. Hardin helped train the team in understanding the law and preparing them for presenting and arguing evidence.
“Mike and Brittany were invaluable in preparing for the competition. We met three times a week for anywhere from two to eight hours,” Huynh said. “Brittany helped me find my voice and learn how to use it effectively, while Mike gave me insight into how to adapt to crazy theories. Together they had a great dynamic and really worked off each other well, which made practice enjoyable while still challenging us.”
The AAJ competition consisted of five different rounds in which the team was required to use the same facts but present their case in different ways and to varying judges, each of whom would make different rulings and have different ways of conducting their courtroom, keeping the competitors constantly on their toes.
“This was an incredible experience. I gained exposure to courtroom proceedings and, more importantly, I learned how to adapt to different rulings and different case theories,” Huynh said. “This experience also taught me that, although being self-reliant is useful, learning to rely on your team and work together is invaluable. During each break our team rallied together to discuss strategy. Four heads are always better than one.”
This was the second time Dugan, Gallo, and Huynh competed in a trial advocacy competition. The all-women team reflected on how training and participating in the competition provided them with a diverse skill set that has better prepared them for a career as a trial lawyer.
Dugan, who delivered the defense opening at the competition, noted, “Knowing how to formulate a strong and persuasive case theory and then write a compelling opening and closing is an incredibly valuable skill.”
Each year, Fordham Law sends several teams of students from the Brendan Moore Trial Advocacy program to competitions across the country.
“What I have learned from competing in the trial advocacy competitions is so incredibly useful and relevant,” said Gallo.
