Bigelow Moot Court was an interesting experience. I think I learned something - think before you speak. But not for too long. And not too hard. And not too complex of thoughts, at least not so complex you can't say them clearly.
The professor judges were an interesting experience. Most students said good things about Stone especially. Strauss and Strahilevitz were supposed to be tough. And Samaha is said to be just brutal. Samaha would make people talk themselves in circles.
It was nice to see that the judges disagreed on points of specific performance. Two would say "That was a good idea to use those words," and then the next would say "I disagree, that wording was awful."
Will I ever do moot court again? I'm not sure. I had a good enough time, but I never want to see a brief again, and I typically don't subject myself to writing 30 pages on something that has no practical use. What would a utilitarian have to say about Moot Court? I'm sure Law & Econ folk must despise the wasted effort.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment