Team 8 Playbill
Team 8 Handout
Team 8 Certificate of Attendance
Team 7 Playbill
Team 7 Handout
Team 7 Certificate of Attendance
Our story begins on the planet Zog in the distant future. In Act I, a landing party from the Starship Enterprise has beamed down to Zog to observe how justice is dispensed on their world. The landing party struggles with whether to let System Five administer a new style of justice or to intervene in some way.
In Act II, the presentation moves backward in time to Zog during a time very much like present day Earth. There, the landing party confronts a more personal style of justice that seems to be the polar opposite of the one they just observed.
Team 5 Playbill
Team 5 Handout
Team 5 Certificate of Attendance
Set first in the private judicial chambers of a Supreme Court in the State of Plenary, United States of America, Team 5’s “Litigating in the Shadows” explores the expanding use of emergency and shadow-docket procedures by appellate courts and the professional responsibility challenges faced by lawyers representing clients whose rights may be extinguished before judicial review occurs. In Act I, Supreme Court justices debate their increased reliance on emergency orders issued without full briefing, oral argument, or written opinions.
In Act II, the presentation moves to a law firm conference room, where lawyers argue over how best to represent their client, Eric Cruz, who faces imminent detention and removal following a Supreme Court emergency order staying a nationwide injunction. The lawyers struggle with how to protect their client while still following rules of professional conduct and maintaining their own credibility for the benefit of their client and other clients they represent.
Team 4 Certificate of Attendance
Team 4’s presentation dramatizes how litigation can involve issues crossing multiple legal specialties. The focus is on areas of crossover between criminal and civil law. Commonly, practitioners in criminal law and civil law may be unfamiliar with the pitfalls and potential trouble spots that may arise from too narrow of a focus on only the issues in their field of practice.
The skit also explores the importance of maintaining high ethical standards regardless of the field of practice. Throughout the skit, the theme of competence echoes in each scene and act.
Team 3 Certificate of Attendance
Set in the fictional Possum Ridge County, Team 3’s “The Age of Eroding Trust – What is Your Duty?” follows Judge Casey Quibble, a conscientious small-town jurist striving to maintain order and impartiality amid growing public skepticism toward the courts. His integrity is challenged when a populist media personality, Grant Powers, uses his public platform to portray Judge Quibble as corrupt and biased, sparking ridicule and distrust within the community.
As the story progresses, the courtroom becomes a mirror of modern tensions over truth, accountability, and the influence of misinformation. In the second act, those tensions deepen with the case of a critical witness who fears appearing in court due to her precarious immigration status. The judge’s struggle to balance the rule of law with compassion highlights a broader concern: the decline of public confidence in the courts as places of fairness and safety for all who seek justice.
Team 2 Certificate of Attendance
The funding of litigation by a third party who is not the client – also known as third-party (or non-party) litigation funding — has been described as one of the “biggest and most influential trends in civil justice” by RAND, the New York Times, and others. It is also controversial. Some have raised concerns that third-party litigation funding fuels frivolous lawsuits or forces vulnerable clients to accept unfair deals. Others argue litigation funding is a dynamic new model for expanding access to justice. Regardless of where you stand, it is indisputable that litigation funding arrangements often lack transparency, creating the risk of unwelcome surprises for attorneys and clients alike. There is potential for conflicts between funder(s) and the party funded. And there is serious danger of breaching the attorney’s duties of confidentiality and loyalty.
Team 2’s presentation explores the ethical and practical issues and pitfalls that arise from third-party litigation funding. Using two scenarios – one from the world of corporate/employment law and another from the world of family law – we consider the way in which the funder’s demands on both attorney and client can suddenly and unexpectedly compromise the attorney’s duties to exercise independent professional judgment, zealously advocate for their client alone, and maintain their client’s confidentiality. The presentation also examines recent legislative proposals in this area.
Team 1 Certificate of Attendance
Team 1’s presentation explores timeless questions about government overreach, professional independence, and the courage to resist unjust authority. When modern lawyers are forced to choose between compliance and principle, the Founding Fathers themselves appear to remind us that the Declaration of Independence wasn’t just a historical document—it was a blueprint for asserting the rights of the people in any era. The play examines how legal professionals balance their duty to the law with their responsibility to challenge unjust laws. Through satirical courtroom drama and revolutionary rhetoric, it questions whether true professionalism means following orders or standing up for constitutional principles. The Declaration’s promise that governments derive their power from “the consent of the governed” becomes a rallying cry against arbitrary executive power, whether wielded by monarch or a modern president with questionable fashion sense.