裡橖眻畦

Skip to main content

61st Annual Theodore L. Reimel Moot Court Competition

ReimelsLogo2020

Semi-Final Round:
Wednesday, November 4 at 6:00 p.m.

Final Round and Award Ceremony:
Thursday, November 5 at 6:30 p.m.

 

The 61st Annual Theodore L. Reimel Moot Court Competition is set to begin with preliminary rounds occurring October 2629. The quarterfinal round will take place on Monday, November 2, with the semifinal round on Wednesday, November 4.

The final round of the competition will take place on Thursday, November 5 at 6:30 p.m. Due to the ongoing pandemic, this years competition will be held virtually. You can register to watch the Semi-Final and Final Rounds.

The Theodore L. Reimel Moot Court Competition is an annual intra-school tournament and a hallowed tradition at 裡橖眻畦 Law. Named in honor of the late Theodore L. Reimel, Judge for the Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas from 1953 to 1973, the competition is designed to foster student development in written and oral advocacy through simulated appellate argument.

This year's judges who will preside over the semi-final round are:

  • The Honorable Mark A. Kearney 84 CLAS, 87 CWSL, Judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
  • The Honorable Alice Beck Dubow, Judge for the Superior Court of Pennsylvania
  • The Honorable Carolyn H. Nichols, Judge for the Superior Court of Pennsylvania

This year's judges who will preside over the final round are:

  • The Honorable Albert Diaz, Judge for the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals
  • The Honorable Duane Benton, Judge for the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals
  • The Honorable Justice Collins J. Seitz Jr. 83, Chief Justice of the Delaware Supreme Court

 

The 61st Annual Thomas L. Reimel Moot Court Competition record on appeal addresses the tension between the two religion clauses of the First Amendment, commonly known as the Free Exercise Clause and the Establishment Clause. The Free Exercise Clause protects individuals rights to believe in, and practice, the religion of their choice without governmental interference. The Establishment Clause prohibits the government from officially establishing a religion i.e., favoring one religion over another or favoring religion over the secular. 

Mandatory Reporter laws require most professionals, such as psychologists, doctors, teachers, etc. to report known or suspected incidents of child abuse or face legal penalties. Some mandatory reporter laws include clergy as mandatory reporters, while other exempt clergy under the clergy-penitent privilege. The clergy-penitent privilege in Illinois exempts clergy from testifying as to information learned in the course of discipline enjoined in his or her capacity as a spiritual advisor. In practice, Illinois clergy-penitent privilege only protects religions with tenets of secrecy, such as Catholicism with its Sacrament of Penance. 

In this fictional problem, the Illinois Supreme Court held that clergy were required to report instances of known or suspected child abuse in accord with Illinois Mandatory Reporter law, which in effect abrogates the clergy-penitent privilege for instances of child abuse. The Petitionera Catholic dioceseappealed the decision arguing that requiring Catholic clergymen to report instances of child abuse learned during confession violates a priests free exercise right by forcing him to choose between excommunication from his religion or abiding by secular law. 

Conversely, the Respondentsthe family of a fifteen-year-old girl who was engaging in intimate relations with one of the Churchs parishionersargue that exempting clergy from the mandatory reporter law violates the Establishment Clause by preferring religion over the secular and by favoring Catholicism at the expense of other religions. The Respondents focus on the limiting language of the statute tending to apply it to only a handful of religions and the fact that the Mandatory Reporter law requires most other professionals who work in close proximity with children to report abuse. This argument takes place in front of the United States Supreme Court.

2020 Competitors

Michael Alves 22

Ryan Kiger 22

Vanessa Ruggiero 22

Kristi Arty 22

Andrew Klee  22

Maximillian Santiago 22

Andrew Bandini 22

Max Lamcken  22

Allie Santulli 22

Sofia Basich 22

Sydney Legagneur 22

Faith Simms 22

Justin Bogle 22

Aubrey Link 22

Mara Stella 22

Matthew Boling  22

Lisa Maeyer 22

Sierra Stockley 22

Luciana Brienza 22

Sarah Martinho 22

Gabrielle Talvacchia 22

Nicolas Burnosky 22

Andrew Milisits 22

Tamar Tellado 22

John Canning 22

Tasha Stoltzfus Nankerville 22

Ferrell Townsend 22

Robert DeDona 22

Emily O'Leary 22

Taylor Tyson 22

Seth Ford 22

Samantha Ollmann 22

Rebecca Velez 22

Delann Fraschetti Finch 22

Catherine Pelham 22

Sarah Wing 22

Elisabeth Freer 22

Tyler Price 22

Laing Wise 22

Jake Glancy 22

Rachael Reeves 22

Ashley Woodruff 22

Annalise Hodges 22

Annie Ringelestein 22

 

Christine Homer 22

Caroline Rini 22

 

Quarterfinalists

Luciana Brienza 22

Emily O'Leary 22

Robert DeDona 22

Catherine Pelham 22

Seth Ford 22

Tyler Price 22

Elisabeth Freer 22

Annie Ringelestein 22

Annalise Hodges 22

Vanessa Ruggiero 22

Aubrey Link 22

Sierra Stockley 22

Sarah Martinho 22

Taylor Tyson 22

Tasha Stoltzfus Nankerville 22

Rebecca Velez 22

Semifinalists

Elisabeth Freer 22

Emily OLeary 22

Annalise Hodges 22

Tyler Price 22

Aubrey Link 22

Rebecca Velez 22

Tasha Stoltzfus Nankerville 22

Vanessa Ruggiero 22

Finalists

 

Emily O'Leary '22 & Rebecca Velez '22

Arguing on behalf of the Church (Petitioner) 

 

Tasha Stoltzfus Nankerville '22 & Annalise Hodges '22

Arguing on behalf of the Haywards (Respondents)