From: Jeffrey Malkan

Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2001 7:20 PM To: Lucinda Finley

Subject: Re: R & W moot court I'm so glad to hear you say this because I ran this basic idea past Nils, Dianne and Peter a few weeks ago. They saw some administrative problems, and also indicated that your support would be crucial. But I would really like (1) to focus the first semester entirely on analysis and writing, (2) defer research to spring semester while introducing persuasive writing in a less formal context, and (3) provide a mandatory moot court exercise in the third semester where it could be coordinated with the internal moot court competition, and benefit from the participation of third year students. The third semester of law school at UB should really have some required legal writing component, and this might be a good way of accomplishing that.

----- Original Message ----- From: Lucinda Finley To: jdmalkan@buffalo.edu Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2001 2:42 PM Subject: R & W moot court

Hi Jeff, Unfortunately, I will have to break my string of "perfect attendance" as a first year R & W judge this year -- i will be in New Zealand from April 6 through 24. I'm really sorry, because you know I still feel some parental responsibility for the success of the program, and believe strongly in faculty help with it! At some point after I get back and you get time to breathe, let's get together to talk about the program, and moot court. I want to bounce ideas about making the internal moot court program more connected with R & W -- perhaps by moving the appellate brief/oral argument component into the 2d year or many other possibilities. I feel that in the first year students need more time to build basic writing and analytic skills, and I also feel that right now,the totally student directed Desmond, with no academic credit, takes student time and energy away from their for credit classes, and is not teaching them much about constructing arguments and writing good briefs or effective oral arguments. What I found in working with my appellate advocacy students this year is that most of them had NO CLUE how to make arguments. What they seem to think a brief is, is a memo-like presentation of lots of cases, with excessive reliance on quotes, and very little in the way of actual argument about the present case. They also seem clueless about how to develop and present an argument that is not directly tied to or stemming from a case -- i.e., what might loosely be called "policy" arguments, or arguments about the actual effect/impact of the thing being challenged.

So, maybe in the first year, what students need work on is making arguments. Then, later, they can worry about putting them together in a polished appellate brief.

Lucinda

From: Jeffrey Malkan

Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 2:01 PM To: Finley, Lucinda

Cc: mlphill@buffalo.edu Subject: Re: Judging for R & W oral arguments

Dear Lucinda:

Thank you for agreeing to judge our 2006 R&W moot court! We have assigned you to the

following panel:

Perkins v. Deardon – Thursday, March 9 Perkins v. Deardon

(Prof. Margaret Phillips)

Judges 1. Linda White lindawhite@oag.state.ny.us

2. Hon. Thomas P. Franczyk mailto:tfranczyk@courts.state.ny.us fax 847-2936 (either way)

3. Prof. Lucinda Finley finleylu@buffalo.edu

4. Angel Overgaard (MCB) amo7@buffalo.edu

We will be sending you a packet containing information on the case, including room

assignments. The reception begins at 6:00 PM, and the oral arguments begin at 6:30 PM. In the

meantime, I’m accessible by e-mail or phone to answer any questions you may have.

Best,

Jeffrey Malkan

jdmalkan@buffalo.edu

----- Original Message ----- From: Finley, Lucinda To: jdmalkan@buffalo.edu Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 7:02 PM Subject: Judging for R & W oral arguments

Dear Jeff, I could do this on March 8 or 9, both nights if you need me. If you just need me for one night, Mar. 9 would be first choice. I will do either Tiberi, Roe, Perkins, or Slade cases – I’m flexible. If you use me for two nights, please put me on the same case, so I only have to learn one. Please e-mail me any materials or have them delivered to 563 Capen. DO not put in my O’Brian mailbox, or I will never get them. Thanks! Lucinda M. Finley Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs University at Buffalo, State Univ. of New York 563 Capen Hall -- North Campus

From: Jeff Malkan

Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2003 7:30 PM To: Lucinda Finley

Subject: Re: R & W moot court Hi Lucinda. It's too bad -- I figured that you'd want to judge the ACLA case. Maybe next year. Actually, my students are doing a great job with the problem. On another topic, I think there's a chance that we might get a third semester appellate advocacy course taught by adjuncts, although not next year. See you at the meeting tomorrow. Jeff

----- Original Message ----- From: Lucinda Finley To: Jeff Malkan Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2003 6:23 PM Subject: R & W moot court

Dear Jeff, Unfortunately, I am out of town during the oral arguments this year, so I will not be able to help out by judging as I usually do. How on earth are you managing to cram all the arguments into three nights? They all sound like interesting cases; knowing the ACLA case as well as I do, that would have been a natural for me to judge -- but I also think the legal issues and the very complex factual record make it way too hard a case for first year students. Lucinda Finley