Third year law student Elizabeth White argued an employment discrimination case in front of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit last Wednesday.
Under the supervision of professor of law Bruce La Pierre, students in the Appellate clinic at the University’s law school have the opportunity to represent actual clients in cases that are to be heard on appeal in this federal Eighth Circuit court.
“[The clinic gave me] the opportunity to work so closely with other students and Professor La Pierre and it simulated a real world law experience by working on a real case with a team,” said White.
The client in this case, International Paper Co. worker Lee Smith, sued the company for his supervisor’s racial discrimination and consequent retaliatory actions against him. When Smith lost his case at the district level, he appealed and the case was then assigned to the University’s appellate clinic.
With the guidance of La Pierre, White and the other law students-Sophie Alcorn, Matt Lewis and T.R Bynumall-worked on the briefs for this case.
White and Alcorn also wrote the reply briefs over the summer.
“In the course of writing the briefs the students have done a great bulk of the work that is necessary to argue the case,” said La Pierre. “The preparation consists of going back over and making sure that they understand the law, but most importantly its making sure that they are thoroughly familiar with the record and that they know the facts of their particular case in great detail.”
Although participating in the clinic is worth four class credits, the law students said that is was hard to juggle it with their other courses. According to Alcorn, she spent up to 15 hours per week researching and writing the briefs for this case.
“It was very challenging. I think the biggest challenge is to keep making time for other commitments because being in a clinic is so compelling. It’s really easy to spend all that time in a clinic and not fine time for anything else,” said Alcorn.
In order to prepare White for presenting her case in court, the Law School created a moot court for which three professors served as the judges and White argued her case before them.
“It gives the student a chance to understand what type of questions may interest a judge when it comes to the real argument so that they will be prepared when they get to the argument,” said La Pierre.
White said that although she was nervous, she felt well prepared as she was arguing her case before the judges last week.
“I was so in awe of the three people I was standing in front of,” said White. “I was so nervous and exhilarated that I don’t think I had time to think and take it in. I just had to respond to the questions they asked me.”
La Pierre stated that White was prepared and did an excellent job.
“Elizabeth faced and handled as strong a set of questions as any lawyer would have faced in the course of her argument,” he said. “She handled it every bit as well as the most talented and most experienced appellate advocate would have done. She did a great job.”
Although White is still a student, she argued against a lawyer; according to La Pierre, students are held to the same standards as lawyers.
“There is every indication that they [the judges] hold the students to absolutely the same standard that they hold all lawyers to,” said La Pierre. “The students have the responsibility to the client and the mere fact that they are students does not reduce the scope of their obligation.”
After she made her argument in court, White said she met and talked to Smith for the first time.
“The most rewarding moment was meeting Mr. Smith and actually shaking his hand and talking to him; hearing the story straight from his mouth and knowing that he had to live through the experience we had read about for the last 10 months.”