A Laborious Effort:
Results of the ABA Labor and Employment Law Trial Competition

With the nation’s leading labor and employment lawyers convening at Dirksen Federal Building to judge the annual ABA Labor and Employment Law Mock Trial Competition, the John Marshall Law School team, consisting of plaintiff’s attorneys Jayson Serrano and Randah Atassi and defense attorney’s Jisoo Kim and Tom Kelley, stepped into the familiar court rooms across the street, ready to win it all on their very own turf. Sixteen teams from around the Midwest region gathered at 8 a.m. on an unusually warm late November morning eagerly waiting to present the case they had prepared for months.

The Defense side was up first representing FAST, Inc. against plaintiff Chris Smith. After well-argued, albeit brief, motions in limine, the trial began. Tom Kelley delivered a great opening statement summarizing the events that led to the firing of Chris Smith. With great evidentiary arguments going back and forth throughout the trial, the round ended after Jisoo Kim delivered a strong closing argument on behalf of FAST.

In the afternoon, it was the Plaintiff’s turn to present their case to the jury.  The round started with Jayson Serrano delivering a passionate opening statement telling the story of Chris Smith. Both Jayson Serrano and Randah Atassi maintained composure during the trial despite the difficult witnesses they were dealt. The round ended as Randah Atassi turned the opposing team’s theme and made it her own in her riveting rebuttal closing arguments.

In both rounds, the judges applauded the JMLS team’s professionalism and the extensive knowledge of the case. The team did not advance to the semis despite winning both preliminary rounds. However, with the help from the trio of coaches Deborah Bussert, Kelly Heaney, and Josh Wolkomir, and support from the alternate team member Jamila Ahmed, the team from John Marshall was able to impress the leading attorneys in the field of labor and employment law from the beginning to end.

Return to Top

Anything but Arbitrary:
Results of the ABA Law Student Division Arbitration Competition

On the weekend of November 21st, the JMLS team of Ben Breslau, Lauren Davalle, Casey Martin, Michael Reever, and Danielle Rudas competed in the ABA Law Student Division Arbitration on the campus of the University of Missouri at Columbia.  The Arbitration Team was coached by JMLS alum and adjunct professor John Spieske. 

This year’s arbitration competition problem was based on a fictional contract dispute between a non-profit organization and a private charitable foundation that donated money to the non-profit through a grant proposal.  The foundation disbursed the funding to the non-profit for the provision of services to the local homeless population.  The parties executed a poorly drafted “donee agreement” that ambiguously spelled out the rights and duties of the parties.  After the first year of the three-year agreement, the foundation wanted to cancel it pursuant to the cancelation provision of the “donee agreement.”  The foundation cited the inability of the non-profit to achieve the proposed goal of establishing a community center in a specific neighborhood. 

The non-profit claimed breach of contract, and the foundation counter-claimed for rescission and restitution.  The “donee agreement” contained an arbitration clause, thus the battle was waged in front of three neutral arbitrators.  Ben Breslau and Daniel Rudas represented the not-for-profit organization, while Casey Martin and Michael Reever represented the charitable foundation. 

The Arbitration team faced stiff competition from the host school, the University of Missouri, as well as Texas Tech University, William Mitchell College of Law and our neighbors across State Street, DePaul University.  Both Texas Tech and Mizzou entered two teams each, which made up the “final four” in this regional competition.  In the end, Texas Tech sent both of its teams to the national competition in Orange County, California.  The John Marshall squad performed well, advancing to the semi-finals, although by default as only seven teams competed. It was a terrific leaning experience, and it will no doubt lead to greater success at future arbitration competitions.  

Return to Top

The Criminal Trial Panel Discussion

On Thursday, November 19th, from noon to 1:00 p.m. in Room 503, the Center for Advocacy and Dispute Resolution and the Trial Advocacy and Dispute Resolution Honors Board hosted their third and final Panel Discussion of the semester. The event was another great success. Nearly fifty students attended to hear two legal professionals discuss what it takes to be successful in a criminal trial.

Students were provided detailed explanations on how to prepare a daily routine of the ins and outs of criminal trials. They were also given guidance on how to get involved in criminal trials, even as a law student. The audience was provided a vast array of insight from two veteran legal professionals. The panel included Brian Holmes, Deputy Supervisor of Gang Prosecutions of the Cook County State’s Attorneys Office, and the Honorable Marvin Luckman, Cook County circuit court judge. The panel was moderated by John Marshall’s Trial Advocacy Presiding Barrister, Brandon DeBerry.

Holmes and Judge Luckman spent more than an hour telling stories and relating personal experiences in criminal trials. Holmes described in detail his role as Deputy Supervisor of Gang Prosecutions. He explained how his role affords him not only the opportunity to prosecute state crimes as an Assistant State’s Attorney but to prosecute federal crimes as a Special U.S. Attorney as well. He detailed how he started working at the Cook County State’s Attorney’s office directly out of law school. Coincidentally, he is also a graduate of The John Marshall Law School.

Judge Luckman first explained his role as a misdemeanor jury trial judge. He described what he witnesses on a daily basis as a judge. He also provided the “dos and don’ts” of what he observes in the courtroom. He further gave advice based on his own experience arguing in a courtroom. Judge Luckman then informed the students that he used to work in private practice as a criminal defense attorney. Before the discussion’s end, Judge Luckman gave one final piece of advice: work a traffic court case. He said that if a young attorney wants to learn all of the essentials in order to effectively argue in a courtroom, he or she can accomplish this in traffic court.

Overall, although some of the scheduled panelists were unable to attend the event, Mr. Holmes and Judge Luckman were both entertaining and informative. They had vast insight that they gladly bestowed upon the future attorneys in the audience. Although I am graduating and will no longer be planning the panel discussions, it seems pretty clear that this tradition will continue on into next semester. Therefore, look forward to more exciting and fascinating panel discussions in the near future!    

Return to Top

Spring Trial Team

After another big turnout at the Mock Trial Teams’ Tryouts and careful considerations the following students have been chosen to the Spring Mock Trial Teams. We have a lot of new talent who will be representing John Marshall and they will no doubt continue the success of Fall Semester Trial Teams. Please help us congratulate the following teams.  

Animal Law Closing Argument Competition at Harvard Law School (2/5-2/7)
Donyel Perry
Anthony Sam

Alternate: Steven Tschiggfrie

Coach: Susann MacLachlan

Texas Young Lawyers Association National Trial Advocacy Competition Team (2/18-20)
Angel Alcaraz
Stephen Berrios
Lauren Davalle
Patrick Keegan
Julia Mezher
Mary Scholl

Coach: Vicki Peters and Bethany Biesenthal

 American Association of Justice Student Trial Advocacy Competition Team (2/25-28)
Team 1
Steve Tschiggfrie
Jeannie LaBarbara
Katie Hagerty
Daniel Yukich

Team 2
Chrissy Morrison
Glenn Curran
Anthony Danhelka
Katie Siefert

Coach: Lance Northcutt, Meredith Shane and Matt Sims

Capitol City Challenge Competition Team (3/19-21)
Wendy Fawcett
Stephanie Greenberg
Mark Malbrough
Jayson Serrano
Alternate: Erika Hamer

Coaches: Kelly Heaney and Josh Wolkomir  

ABA/JMLS National Criminal Justice Trial Advocacy Team (3/25-27)
Andrea Crivolio
James Bradley
Mike Reever
Erin Moriarity

Coaches: Mark Javier and Lou Longhitano

Return to Top

Spring ADR Team

This semester’s tryouts for the Spring semester Alternative Dispute Resolution teams were some of the most competitive we’ve seen in the Center for Advocacy and Dispute Resolution.  Tryout slots went like hot cakes for these teams and we are proud to announce the following selections:

International Law School Mediation Tournament, March 2010  
Cameron Anderly
Alaa Elayyan
Chris Melnyczenko
Oana Militaru
Anya Nikogosian
Anthony Sam  

Alternates:
Jessica Davis
Victor Ortiz  

ABA Law Student Division Client Counseling Competition, February 2010  
Jamila Ahmed
Nicholas Corriano
Ann Hagerty
Barry Kanarek
Rachel Abejuela Morse
Joseph Napoli
Patricia Ross
Tanya Sinclair  

Also, a quick shout out to our ABA Law Student Division Negotiation Team, Alex Dimitt and Patricia Ross, who made it to Nationals in February!  

Congratulations and the best of luck to all these competitors!

Return to Top

Getting to Know Your Director of the Center for Advocacy and Dispute Resolution

Julia Mezher (M10) interviews Professor Ron Smith, Director of John Marshall's Center for Advocacy and Dispute Resolution.

Q. What is your favorite music?
A. Are all the questions going to be this hard? Well, my favorites include Segovia’s Spanish Guitar music, Scott Joplin’s piano music, Ruth Etting’s songs, and anything by Mozart.

Q. You told me you were in the U.S. Navy. What was your most memorable experience?
A. It is difficult to isolate a most memorable experience when there were so many people, places, and intense challenges. Probably night flying off a carrier in the middle of the Atlantic in winter. I learned a lot and traveled a lot in the six plus years I was on active duty as a Naval Aviator.

Q. What was your favorite class in law school?
A. For the first two years of law school I thought I was in the wrong place, but I stuck it out. Third year jelled everything. I believe my course in Labor Law, taught by the late Alfred Kamin, was my favorite course. I met his family in later years and I am still good friends with his sons Chet and Malcolm – both are excellent lawyers and great fun.

Q. You have many colorful wood carvings of fish in your office. What is the story on those fish?
A.  The colorful fish come from several places, but most are from the shop at the Chicago Art Institute. The fish are more fun to look at than the back covers of BNA binders.

Q. If you could have any career, besides being a lawyer, what would you be?
A. Decadent Roman Emperor would be nice for a while, but the job usually did not last too long. Nothing beats being a law professor, so I don’t really think about doing anything else.

Q. Do you have any pets, if so what kind and what are their names?
A. My wife Mary Ann has pets, and she is now down to one dog and four cats. The pets tolerate me. They are all named after Polish cookies (I am not making this up).

Q. Who is your role model?
A. I suppose I should say that the Dean of The John Marshall Law School is my role model, but he would see through that sycophantic ploy in a heartbeat. I’ve had many role models: I have learned from many, many people.

Q. Aside from being the director of the trial advocacy department, what has been your favorite job?
A. I worked for WGN-TV before I went into the Navy, and I thought working in television was a blast.

Q. If you could meet one person, dead or alive, who would it be and why?
A. I’d like to meet the person who borrowed my favorite John Marshall baseball hat off the piano in 3E the other day.

Q. What is your favorite food of all time?
A. Well, right now my favorite is the grilled sardines at Mono’s restaurant in New York City.

Q: Your favorite interviewer?  
A: Julia Mezher.  

Return to Top

Become a fan of the Center on FACEBOOK