Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: 2012 Board Agenda

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    375
    Karma
    36

    2012 Board Agenda

    The 2012 Board Agenda is posted on the AMTA website: http://www.collegemocktrial.org/mock...ingAgenda2.doc

  2. #2
    Senior Member captainbowtie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Des Moines, IA
    Posts
    455
    Karma
    21
    Of some interest:
    • Motion to remove requirement for reserving rebuttal time (RSC-06)
    • Motion to modify MRE based on the restyled FRE (RSC-07)
    • Motion to allow 4 years of participation instead of 5 (RSC-08)
    • Codifying of trial order (RSC-12)
    • How to determine A,B,C teams (TAC-03)
    Tabled Motions (require five or more votes to be considered)
    • Obligation of directing attorney to correct material invention of fact (RSC-10)
    Ray Barr (the Amazing)
    University of Minnesota Law School
    Drake University, 2014
    "Bow ties are cool."

  3. #3
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    24
    Karma
    11
    Very interesting. I wonder what changes will actually go through. Would be nice to not have to worry about forgetting to reserve rebuttal. Our team slipped up once last season and out closer forgot to reserve time.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,833
    Karma
    54
    • Motion to remove requirement for reserving rebuttal time (RSC-06)
    • Motion to modify MRE based on the restyled FRE (RSC-07)
    • Motion to allow 4 years of participation instead of 5 (RSC-08)
    • Codifying of trial order (RSC-12)
    • How to determine A,B,C teams (TAC-03)
    Tabled Motions (require five or more votes to be considered)
    • Obligation of directing attorney to correct material invention of fact (RSC-10)
    I agree with every single one except for the last one, which I don't fully understand.

  5. #5
    Senior Member captainbowtie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Des Moines, IA
    Posts
    455
    Karma
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Nur Rauch View Post
    I agree with every single one except for the last one, which I don't fully understand.
    It was one of the tabled motions (page 35), and it seems to be saying that if a directing attorney knows or should know their witness is making up material facts, they either have to do more questioning to show that it was a material invention or by notifying the judge of the invention. Failure to do so could result in a point deduction, though the rule doesn't allow opposing counsel anyway of pointing out material invention other than impeachment.

    I think it's an attempt to increase potential penalties for witnesses making things up on direct. I doubt it even gets un-tabled, though.
    Ray Barr (the Amazing)
    University of Minnesota Law School
    Drake University, 2014
    "Bow ties are cool."

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    52
    Karma
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by captainbowtie View Post
    It was one of the tabled motions (page 35), and it seems to be saying that if a directing attorney knows or should know their witness is making up material facts, they either have to do more questioning to show that it was a material invention or by notifying the judge of the invention. Failure to do so could result in a point deduction, though the rule doesn't allow opposing counsel anyway of pointing out material invention other than impeachment.

    I think it's an attempt to increase potential penalties for witnesses making things up on direct. I doubt it even gets un-tabled, though.
    If a witness is making up a fact on direct to unfairly benefit their case (which is generally the complaint), doesn't it follow that the directing attorney was probably in on it? Without an objection from opposing counsel, why would they feel compelled to do this? Seems as if the only way this would work without such an objection is if each judge were to read the entirety of the case before each round, which certainly would be a change for how most tournaments are directed.

    Also, is there a grandfather clause on that 4 year rule (which I agree with)? I'm sure there's some teams out there that would be in for a shocker if there wasn't leeway given due to implementation timing.
    Last edited by Vexed; 06-29-2012 at 02:53 PM.

  7. #7
    Senior Member captainbowtie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Des Moines, IA
    Posts
    455
    Karma
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Vexed View Post
    Also, is there a grandfather clause on that 4 year rule (which I agree with)? I'm sure there's some teams out there that would be in for a shocker if there wasn't leeway given due to implementation timing.
    The rules committee was in favor of passing the four year rule, the question (which will probably be addressed at the board meeting) is whether to implement it this year or for the 2013-2014 season. See below:

    "COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS ADOPTION
    (Note from the Rules Committee: the Committee did not reach a decision as to whether this rule should take effect immediately or beginning with the 2013-14 season)."
    Ray Barr (the Amazing)
    University of Minnesota Law School
    Drake University, 2014
    "Bow ties are cool."

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    51
    Karma
    10
    I understand the rational behind the 4 years of competition change, but it is pretty absurd to put that into effect this year with no warning to the students who have already made plans around this year.

    If it was 2013-2014, and made public, then at least there would be some warning.

    Looking at last years board meeting it seems like adoption rates are high for things the committee recommends. Hopefully the board isn't daft.
    Last edited by Pandaemonium; 07-14-2012 at 10:37 PM.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    416
    Karma
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by captainbowtie View Post
    Of some interest:
    Motion to remove requirement for reserving rebuttal time (RSC-06)
    Motion to modify MRE based on the restyled FRE (RSC-07)
    Motion to allow 4 years of participation instead of 5 (RSC-08)
    Codifying of trial order (RSC-12)
    How to determine A,B,C teams (TAC-03)
    Tabled Motions (require five or more votes to be considered)
    Obligation of directing attorney to correct material invention of fact (RSC-10)
    RSC-06 - passed. Prosecution/Plaintiff no longer need to reserve time for rebuttal.
    RSC-07 - passed.
    RSC-08 - failed.
    RSC-12 - passed.
    TAC-03 - passed subject to a minor revision. ("Shall" replaced with "may")
    RSC-10 - not untabled and not discussed.

    Plus, those in attendance got to meet Big Tom. As in, THE Big Tom.

    Have a great year, y'all.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Grafton, Wis.
    Posts
    322
    Karma
    48
    Also of note: the 2014 Championship will be held at the Orange County Courthouse in Orlando, Fla. (Hosted by UCF.)

    For those who don't know, the 2013 Championship will be held in Washington, D.C.
    I post in my personal capacity, not on behalf of AMTA.

  11. #11
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Athens, GA
    Posts
    20
    Karma
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by MizzouMock View Post
    Also of note: the 2014 Championship will be held at the Orange County Courthouse in Orlando, Fla. (Hosted by UCF.)

    For those who don't know, the 2013 Championship will be held in Washington, D.C.
    Do you have a list of Regional and ORCS sites available as well?

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Grafton, Wis.
    Posts
    322
    Karma
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by dr.neebers View Post
    Do you have a list of Regional and ORCS sites available as well?
    My understanding is that Regional and ORCS sites are not 100% final yet, sorry!
    I post in my personal capacity, not on behalf of AMTA.

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    South Bend, IN
    Posts
    424
    Karma
    47
    Anyone have the minutes of the meeting? I don't see them on the AMTA website.

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    176
    Karma
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by NDmock View Post
    Anyone have the minutes of the meeting? I don't see them on the AMTA website.
    Minutes are not available yet - announcement will be made on the AMTA website, twitter (@AMTAMockTrial) and facebook when they are finalized.

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    46
    Karma
    9
    Minutes just became available:
    http://www.collegemocktrial.org/amtaminutes2012.pdf

    Looks like we don't have to reserve time for rebuttals anymore, among other things

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •