University of Miami School of Law Win Duberstein Bankruptcy Moot Court Competition

Moot Court IS MAKING ITS WAY towardS a top national ranking

Coral Gables, FL (March 27, 2009 – LAWFUEL) – Further propelling the Charles C. Papy, Jr. Moot Court Board toward a top national ranking, the University of Miami School of Law won the 17th annual Chief Judge Conrad B. Duberstein Bankruptcy Moot Court Competition. The competition was held March 14th through 17th at St. John’s University in Queens, New York.

The UM Law team, consisting of Omar Bradford, 2L, Natalie Boyajian, 2L, and Michael Rothenberg, 3L, took first place out of 47 teams from law schools across the country. Another UM law team, consisting of Vincent Alexander, 3L, Shannon Puopolo, 3L, and Kristin Stastny, 3L, received an honorable mention for their brief.

“Preparing for this competition was both mentally demanding and stimulating,” said Boyajian. “It required me to leave my comfort zone and begin to research, learn, and advocate regarding challenging legal bankruptcy issues.”

UM Law Professor Patricia Redmond, who has led the school to great success in this competition over the past decade, advised the teams through approximately 30 practice rounds, with the support of UM Law Professor and substantive consolidation expert, William Widen. Local judges and practitioners also assisted in judging rounds throughout the teams’ preparation.

The Duberstein Moot Court Competition is the only national competition devoted to bankruptcy law. The Duberstein Competition is designed to simulate an appeal before the United States Supreme Court. This year, teams prepared briefs and oral arguments on two important and unresolved issues in bankruptcy law. The first issue was whether the appropriate test for substantive consolidation is the strict standard announced by the Third Circuit in Owens Corning or the liberal “modern test” used in some other circuits. The second issue dealt with whether a creditor’s vote on a plan can be disqualified because its economic incentives are contrary to those if its class of claims.

Scroll to Top