How To Please The Court: A Moot Court Handbook.

Vol. 14 No.11 (November 2004), pp.852-853

HOW TO PLEASE THE COURT: A MOOT COURT HANDBOOK, by Paul I. Weizer (ed.). New York: Peter Lang, 2004. 200pp. Paperback. $19.95. ISBN: 0-8204-6949-1

Reviewed by Clifford Angell Bates, Jr., American Studies Center, Uniwersytet Warszawski. Warsaw, Poland. Email: c.a.bates@uw.edu.pl

This book is exactly what it says it is, a hand book for those interested how to prepare effectively for moot court. The editor, Paul Weizer picked several good authors to write concise and clear “how to” chapters. Kimi King’s chapters on “Understanding Legal Research” (Chapter One) and “The Basis of Oral Argument” (Chapter Two) stand out, as very good general summaries that could have applications outside of demonstrating the basics of moot court. The second could easily have been in a book about the nature of the American legal system or legal process; whereas the first would be useful for any legal methods course in that it presents legal research in a way young students with little understanding of it could easily grasp the concept.

A chapter by Lewis Ringel and Charles Knerr offers a brief summary argument (a mere 9 pages) regarding what moot court is all about—i.e., what one get from doing it. The same could be said of the conclusion by William Schreckhise, which briefly discusses what opportunities arise from one’s experience in moot court. As a sales pitch for moot court, it was fine, but the essay offers very little else. So too with Charles Knerr’s and Andrew Sommerman’s “Moving Beyond the Classroom: The Moot Court Tournament.” Although it is a good guide to how to prepare for competitions, it offers the reader little else if one has little or no interest in them.

On the other hand, Lewis Ringel’s “From Opening to Closing: Ten Keys to Success and Other Helpful Tips” (Chapter Four) gives a student a very good introductory guide to legal rhetoric and the ways of good legal argument. Ringel’s piece complements King’s chapter on “Oral Argument,” and either could be used as a nice introduction to legal rhetoric.

The book has 10 Appendices that make up nearly half of the book. Ringel’s “Important Legal Terms” is a nice quick glossary of common Anglo-American legal terms and is quite useful for those with little familiarity with Anglo-American law. Also King’s “Major Electronic Publishers,” “LexisNexis, Shepard’s Citations, and Westlaw’s KeyCite Citations,” “Common Boolean Terms and Connectors,” and “Internet Legal Resources,” are clear and useful guides for those unfamiliar with legal research and very important tools for engaging in it effectively. Then there is King’s “How to Brief a Case,” which presents a very good guide for briefing cases in Anglo-American law. In the next appendix, “Sample Case Brief—Griswald v. Connecticut,” King offers a specific and concrete example using the method she sketched in the preceding [*853] essay. In her next two appendices, “Quick Checklists for Oral Argument” and “Nine Things Someone Should Have Told You (But Probably Didn’t),” provide useful advice for those getting ready to do moot court, and the final appendix by Paul Weizer and Lewis Ringel, presents two sample cases.

Again if you are looking for an inexpensive, clear, concise, and strait-forward guide to moot court, this small book is just the ticket. In addition, several chapters and four or five of the appendices are rather useful introductions to legal research methods and the nature of legal rhetoric and could be used for those purposes as well.

************************************************************