The CWRU National team, consisting of Angie Daling, Will York and Jimmy Hoffman, student coached by Morgan Sigman, and coached by Professor Katy Mercer, advanced to the National Competition after defeating the teams who participated in the Regional Rounds in Toledo this past November. At the beginning of February, the team traveled to New York City, where they advanced to Day 3, the “sweet sixteen round” – beating out at least 12 of the other law schools who represented the United States in the National Competition, ultimately winning on orals, but defeated by a negligible margin overall in their final round. Over 190 law schools from around the country competed in this competition as a whole.

This year’s National Problem involved what standard a court should apply when deciding a motion for a preliminary injunction where it cannot determine with certainty that the motion is more likely than not to prevail on the merits of the underlying claim, and whether a city’s Healthcare Security Ordinance was preempted by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”).

The success of this year’s team is due in large part to the several alumni, students, attorneys and professors who helped by judging the numerous practices over the past few months. The team would like to thank all for their contributions.

The CWRU National team, consisting of Angie Daling, Will York and Jimmy Hoffman, student coached by Morgan Sigman, and coached by Professor Katy Mercer, advanced to the National Competition after defeating the teams who participated in the Regional Rounds in Toledo this past November. At the beginning of February, the team traveled to New York City, where they advanced to Day 3, the “sweet sixteen round” – beating out at least 12 of the other law schools who represented the United States in the National Competition, ultimately winning on orals, but defeated by a negligible margin overall in their final round. Over 190 law schools from around the country competed in this competition as a whole.

This year’s National Problem involved what standard a court should apply when deciding a motion for a preliminary injunction where it cannot determine with certainty that the motion is more likely than not to prevail on the merits of the underlying claim, and whether a city’s Healthcare Security Ordinance was preempted by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”).

The success of this year’s team is due in large part to the several alumni, students, attorneys and professors who helped by judging the numerous practices over the past few months. The team would like to thank all for their contributions.