News & Events
Moritz Law Team Brings Home National Title
Constitutional Law moot court team takes top honors at the 2006 Sutherland Cup Competition
April 10, 2006
The 2006 Sutherland Cup, L-R: finalists from Catholic University of America, Adam Bitter, Denise Giraudo, Christina Heide; final round judges, Hon. David Sentelle, D.C. Court of Appeals, United States Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas and Hon. Richard C. Tallman, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit; the winning team from Moritz Law, Zachary Bolitho and Wesley Duncan.
The Constitutional Law moot court team from The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law took top honors at the 2006 Sutherland Cup Competition, held at The Catholic University of America Columbus School of Law over the weekend of March 31-April 1.
Wesley Duncan, a third-year student from Sonora, Calif., and Zachary Bolitho, a second-year from Dennison, Ohio, not only won the competition, but also received the Best Brief title. They are coached by J.B. Jasiunas, a 2001 graduate of the Moritz College of Law and an assistant state public defender with the Ohio Public Defenderís office.
In the final round against the team from Catholic University, the Ohio State team argued in front of U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas. Also on the panel of judges were the Hon. David Sentelle, D.C. Court of Appeals, and the Hon. Richard C. Tallman, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit.
An appellate advocacy competition focusing on constitutional law, the Sutherland Cup Competition is the oldest national moot court competition in the United States. Teams must submit a brief and deliver oral arguments before a panel of practicing attorneys or judges.
The law schools represented in this yearís competition included New York Law School, Boston University, Duke University, University of Virginia, George Mason University, Catholic University, University of Southern California and Ohio State University. Students argued a case involving a challenge to a felon disenfranchisement law passed by the state of Florida, which petitioners argued had a discriminatory impact on African-Americans. The case implicated the Voting Rights Act and the 14th Amendment and posed fundamental questions about federalism.