News & Events
Mitchell Panter and Jessica Johnson
Jessica Johnson, Mitchell Panter win '11 Advocates Prize
The team of Jessica Johnson and T. Mitchell Panter are the winners of the 2011 Advocates’ Prize competition held Oct. 21 and also had the Best Brief. Additionally, Johnson was named Best Oralist. Austin Kupke and Samuel Moore were team runnersup. Two teams tied for Second Best brief -– Monica Goldblatt and Crystal Enekwa and Eugene Choi and Daniel Hall.
This year’s competition attracted 22 teams of second- and third- year law students. The hypothetical case, United States of America v. Stacie Gillingham, posed issues related to the parent-child privilege and the Sixth Amendment right to compulsory process. Each team participated in a brief writing workshop and an appellate argument boot camp and filed an appellate brief on behalf of one of the parties.
This year’s final round marked the first time in the history of the competition that competitors had the opportunity to argue before six federal appeals court judges.
This year's judges represent the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit and included Judge Danny J. Boggs, Judge Julia S. Gibbons, Judge Ronald Lee Gilman, Judge Gilbert S. Merritt, Judge Eugene E. Siler, Jr. and Judge Jane Branstetter Stranch. Merritt was the presiding judge.
The Advocates' Prize competition allows students to present an oral argument before a panel of judges. Students are judged on the quality of the oral argument for the competition. Judges prepare for the competition by reviewing a bench brief, thus they are familiar with the facts, case law, and will ask probing questions pertaining to issues raised.
Judges score each competitor based on a variety of factors, including content and persuasiveness of argument; knowledge and use of legal authority; and poise and effectiveness in responding to questions from the bench.