Campus News

UB Law team advances to moot court finals

Douglass moot court teams

Twelve UB law students competed in teams of two in the Northeast Regional round of the Frederick Douglass Moot Court Competition. Front row: Safa Robinson ‘17, Ashmita Roka ’17, Maria Apruzzese ‘17 and Natasha Yunas ‘17. Second row: Megan Knepka '17, Michael Marrero ‘17, Andrew DeMasters ’16 and Kevin Lelonek '16. Third row: Chris Sasiadek '16, John Minnick ’17, Mathew John '16 and Andrew Tabashneck '16.


Published March 4, 2016

UB law students are competing next week at the national Frederick Douglass Moot Court Competition.

The UB team of John Minnick and Michael Marrero, both second-year students, was one of three teams selected to go on to the national competition after competing in the Northeast Regional round in January in Newark, N.J.

The three Northeast Regional teams will join 15 other teams selected during six regional competitions to participate in the national finals, being held March 8-13 in Baltimore.

Another UB team — second-year student Ashmita Roka and third-year student Christopher Sasiadek — won the award for Best Petitioner Brief at the regional competition.

Six UB teams competed in the Northeast Regional round of the Douglass competition, a national appellate-advocacy competition held annually since 1975 by the National Black Law Student Association, the largest law student organization in the United States.

In addition to Minnick, Marrero, Roka and Sasiadek, other UB students who competed in the regional round were third-year students Kevin Leloneck, Mathew John, Andrew DeMasters and Andrew Tabashneck, and second-year students Maria Apruezzese, Natasha Yunas, Meghan Knepka and Safa Robinson.

To be chosen to represent UB Law in the Douglass competition, students were required to compete in an intramural selection process by submitting a case brief and making an oral argument during spring 2015. Successful competitors then were matched into teams of two. 

For the regional competition, each team completed a 30-page brief on the constitutionality of a potentially discriminatory felony disenfranchisement statute under the 14th Amendment and Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.