Letter From The Editor

Greetings to all members of the WLS community,

          As I wander around campus week in and week out, I hear students voice their opinions, positive and negative, about the realities of law school. Our readers will be informed about some of these realities in this edition of The Zealous Advocate. With that said, I am happy that the ZA is an open forum for students to have their voice heard. Their voices can be an instrument of change that can be used to improve Whittier Law School.

          For example, as a member of the Student Bar Association (SBA), the most common complaint I hear about, by far, concerns Whittier’s grading policy. The complaint doesn’t change. It is always about how the grading policy is unfair, unjust and simply holds Whittier back. This edition will feature an article that focuses on this topic. I hope it provides answers and raises new questions our readers may have.

         However, on the other hand, it should be noted how much effort and emphasis the administration puts on the academic success of its students. An obvious example is how much focus the law school puts on early bar prep courses. I have heard that many of our own bar takers did not attend these optional prep courses last spring, yet the course attracted students from as far as UCLA Law because its law school doesn’t offer what Whittier offers its students.

         Still, the moment is ripe to approach the administration on areas which we all agree need to be improved. However, we as students should also take full advantage of what WLS has to offer in assisting its students to become successful professionals in the legal field. In turn, I hope this will improve our school for future students.

         I plan to release three editions of the ZA this semester. I cordially invite the entire student body to write and voice their thoughts in this open forum. The semester’s final release will be the ZA yearbook, marking school events through the academic calendar year. I invite any students who are interested in contributing to the ZA to contact me at my email address below.   

         Also, I would like to take this time to congratulate those students who have successfully initiated — and re-initiated — new student organizations this year. This includes the National Lawyers Guild (NLG) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Both organizations are connected to a strong network potential with other NLG and ALCU chapters at nearby schools. I encourage students interested in the area of civil rights to get involved.     

        Finally, a honorable mention goes out to Tunisia, Egypt and to its people and to the beginning of a new wave of democracy that is spreading throughout the Middle East.

         I wish all students a year of positive growth and achievement. As twenty-eleven has already shown to be a new year full of promise and change, I return this semester with an open ear and an aura of curiosity

Artoor Minas



A New Tradition is Born

by Jess Gilbert

          The inaugural OC Law Olympics turned out to be a great success.   It was held on the Whittier Law School campus on February 4th.  There were 4 teams representing Whittier Law School and 4 teams from Western State, and a lot of spectators to support their friends and classmates.  Everyone was there to have fun, enjoy an afternoon of great weather and snacks, compete in the games and ultimately win the trophy for their school. The Western State pink team managed to take first place, but the Whittier red team did not make it easy for them.  

          There were 6 events in total, but Human Foosball was the clear favorite of both the competitors and spectators.  Players attached to bungi cords had to maneuver a soccer ball into the net of the opposing team. It looked a lot more difficult than the foosball games we see in the student lounge, yet even more fun.   

          The final event, the Gauntlet, was also well-received.  This was a particular favorite of certain SBA members, who hid in the back and tried to trick competitors into going off course.  As if these teams hadn’t been put through enough by the end of the day!

           Thank you to everyone who planned, participated, volunteered, or just came out to support the event.  Let’s make it even bigger and better next year!

Here are some comments from the students:

I think the OC Law Olympics at Whittier went really well.  It was a lot of fun to partake in the events and meet the other students from Western.  I think everyone’s favorite was the foosball game.  It definitely got everyone involved and even if you weren’t playing, it was pretty fun to watch…and of course laugh along with what was going on inside the playing area.  Hopefully from this, it will grow next year to an even bigger event with more participants.  Thanks to the SBA for putting it on.

-Nick Pomponio

The OC Olympics was a great time.  It was fun to spend a Friday afternoon with other WLS students and students from the neighboring law schools being competitive outside of the classroom.  Instead of the constant reminder that we will all be competing for the same jobs and clients in the next few years, participants were able to drop their outlines in the name of good-spirited traditional (the long jump) and non-traditional (human foosball) sporting events.  For the most part, everything seemed to run smoothly and the WLS SBA was on top of making sure everyone knew where they were supposed to be and oversaw the events fairly.  The Olympics was definitely an event that celebrated the concept “the more the merrier,” but the people that did made sure the events were full of fun and fair play.  I definitely plan to participate again next year and look forward to it and any other great events the SBA has up their sleeve this semester.

-Blake Slater

The OC Law Olympics turned out to be a friendly yet competitive event, and hopefully it will be a yearly event.  It was well attended by both Whittier and Western State and after meeting several of the students, we agreed to hold a football match as one of next years events.  I never really thought much of the events, but after competing, I was amazed at how interesting and fun something like the human foosball could actually be.  The next several days showed how strenuous the event actually was when soreness made walking a challenge.

-Alec Walker

-Photography by Kash Khan

ABA Corner

          Every semester the ABA Law Student Division holds meetings around the country to discuss issues that are important to law students; addressing their concerns, providing opportunities for professional development, allowing students the opportunity to network with other students and legal professionals. These regional meetings take place within the circuit that the ABA has identified with the schools. Whittier Law School is a proud member of the 9th Circuit, which covers the Southern California region and Hawaii. Being a part of this prestigious organization definitely has its perks and privileges, but not all of the schools in our circuit participate and the schools that do participate usually receive wider, national recognition for being active members of the ABA.

            Whittier Law School has consistently participated in these meetings in the passed, but the numbers have not been strong. This year, we would like to make the Whittier contingent as strong as we possibly can. The fall meeting saw 8 members of the Whittier community attend the conference at Loyola. This semester we want to at least double that number. The Spring Meeting is being held in San Diego at Thomas Jefferson School of Law on Saturday, February 26th. The conference will be an all day affair with opportunities to meet local judges, lawyers, and other legal professionals and to hear their experiences and advice through panel discussions. The meeting is free and breakfast and lunch are provided.

            In order to get as many students to attend as possible, we are exploring the possibility of renting a shuttle to take as many students as possible to the meeting, but we need to get a head count of how many students are likely to attend. I encourage every student to consider attending. If you would like more information about the meeting or would like to register, please contact me at dbell@poets.whittier.edu and I will be happy to discuss the meeting with you.

            Together, we will make Whittier Law School the strongest law school that it possibly can be! GO POETS!

by David C. Bell, ABA Representative      

Forced Mean is a Catch-22 in Smaller Classes

by Mike Ruttle

           Would you take a class if your grade were pre-determined? Me neither. What about if you knew that it was very, VERY unlikely to get an “A” in the class? I didn’t think so. Nevertheless, that is exactly what happens in smaller classes where Professors are forced to comply with the school’s “forced mean” policy.

            What do I mean by a “forced mean”? Allow me to explain. Whittier’s grading policy says that “upper-level courses with fewer than twenty-one students … are not subject to distribution requirements, [meaning the professor doesn’t “have to” give a certain number of “As” or “Bs” etc.] … [However], the mean for final grades for all upper-level courses, except seminars, shall be standardized within the range of 2.5-2.875 points.” Whittier Law School Policies 2010-2011 B10-11 (emphasis added). The policy then goes on to discuss some elaborate formula used “for the sole purposes of computing the mean.” My question is simply, what’s the point? Why are grades in smaller classes “forced” to have a “C” average. I’ve heard the word “fairness” thrown around, but nothing about this seems fair to me.

            I think it is safe to say that most upper-level courses are non-bar electives that students want to take because they have a particular interest in learning that area of the law. Yet, in smaller classes the professor is forced to comply with this policy. That means that one student who earns a 3.6, or an “A-” is balanced out by another student who receives a 2.15, or a “D-” to stay within the upper end of the required mean. Professors can petition the Academic Standards Committee (“ASC”) so that they are not forced to comply with the mean, but based on what other students have told me about their experiences, those petitions are usually denied and the student’s grades suffer as a result.

            This brings me to my main point. Many electives have only a few students. This semester, I am taking a very interesting course with only four (4) students. I thought the idea of giving us the option to take electives was to give us a chance to study areas of the law we find interesting and pursue a concentration. However, knowing about this system, I was recently faced with a Catch-22. Option 1: take a course where I’m interested in the subject, knowing that my chances of a high grade are dismal, unless my professor’s petition is granted by the ASC (see above). Option 2: drop a course and miss out on a valuable learning opportunity because I don’t want to risk my GPA taking a severe blow. Reluctantly, I chose the former.

            Am I being over-dramatic? Before you answer, consider the fact that one 3L (on the Honor Roll) told me she recently received the lowest grade ever in law school as a result of this system. Consider the fact that another 3L (also on the Honor Roll) told me she has come to “accept the fact that [she] will receive lower grades than [she] earned in undergrad.” Consider the fact that another student was disqualified from an externship opportunity after his professor’s petition to the ASC was (allegedly) denied and this student’s grade in the class went from a 3.8 to a 3.0. Am I still being over-dramatic?

            In larger classes, perhaps there is a stronger argument for curved grading, and a forced mean. But in smaller classes with only a few students, I fail to see how grades that accurately reflect a student’s performance in the class is “unfair.”I have been told that a forced mean is “absolutely necessary to promote fairness” without further explanation. I am inviting anyone to please explain to me how this system works, because I frankly do not understand.

            I am not asking that all professors hand out “As” like candy at Halloween. Nor am I asking that Whittier should do away with curved grading entirely because 1) I know that will never happen; 2) a forced mean makes [a little] more sense in larger classes; and 3) curved grading is said to be required of all ABA-accredited law schools. What I am merely asking for is a system that accurately reflects a student’s aptitude. When a student earns an “A,” but receives a “B-” or even a “C+” there is something inherently wrong with that system.

            If that seems too much to ask, then at the very least I invite anyone to please write a response to this article explaining to all Whittier students why this system is “fair.”  One thing I have definitely learned in my time here is that there are two sides to every issue and I am open to seeing the other side of this issue. Unfortunately, I am unable to see how a system that can arbitrarily lower a student’s GPA and not reflect their aptitude is fair.


On Common Ground

by Aastha Maadan

           Every year since 1999, Whittier Law School organizes a week-long series of events to raise awareness of multiple issues facing our society. The idea for this week of events first arose in response to the horrifying murders of Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr.. Students at Whittier Law School created On Common Ground out of a desire to recognize and acknowledge our (dis)connections to other human beings. The issues that On Common Ground addresses include both social and legal problems concerning gender, sexual orientation, race, class, diversity and more. On Common Ground strives to encourage conversations about these issues in an attempt to confront them and eradicate them from society and the legal field. Events include distinguished speakers, The Clothesline Project, an annual brunch book discussion, a forum for students to express their views and many more. 

           This year, On Common Ground is being organized by a great, dynamic team of students. On Common Ground wants the Whittier Law community to “Speak up!” Confronting a problem is the first step to addressing it, and eventually stopping it. We invite you to actively participate this week through speaker panels, the ribbon wreath, the open house/forum, anywhere you see injustice being done, and of course, in your law school courses. 

          Some of the events this year include a movie screening sponsored by Whittier OUTLaw, a speaker panel on free speech in the classroom, diversity food fair, a panel of judicial officers who will speak about diversity on the bench, a brunch book discussion and many more events. On Common Ground  2011 is ending with a much anticipated production of Eve Ensler’s The Vagina Monologues by Whittier students. This year’s production will raise money and awareness for organizations that work to stop violence against women. This year’s beneficiaries are the Rape Treatment Center at Santa Monica - UCLA Medical Center and V-Day, a campaign to mobilize women and men to heightened awareness about violence against women and girls through various campaigns. 

          We encourage you to participate in each event and assist in the planning process for those interested. If you have any questions, please contact Aastha at amadaa@poets.whittier.edu, or Kelsey at kmckeeve@poets.whittier.edu

Building Bridges with Our Local Community

by Artoor Minas

Earlier this semester, I felt conflicted. I wasn’t sure what class I should take. It would have been great to take one of the seminars on Bankruptcy or Tax law; those were my two logical choices since they fit perfectly into my schedule. Then I ran into Mr. Kyle Varga on campus, a friend and fellow 2L classmate. I told him about my situation and that I needed to enroll into another class, but was hesitant with the classes that were available. Without giving it a second thought, he then instructed me to take Street Law.

         What is Street Law? As I have quickly realized, street law is not your ordinary law class. There is no professor calling on you at random. There are no cases read, no grades, just a simple pass-fail designation for each person in the class, which helps eliminate the awful cut-throat, competitive environment of law school. In Street Law, you go out into the community and you are the teacher.

         Street Law began in 1972 at Georgetown University School of Law as a way of reaching out to the local community. The program has since spread to law schools throughout the nation including Whittier Law School. The  Street Law program reaches out to at-risk high school students, many of whom have already been in trouble with the law. The program seeks to provide a greater understanding of the law to these students, empowering them with the knowledge of their basic fundamental rights as U.S. citizens. It is certainly a rare opportunity for law students to become the educator.

         Having been a high school teacher in Hungary prior to my arrival to Whittier, I became immediately interested in attending my first Street Law class after listening to Mr. Varga’s pitch. I acquire two units for getting to know a group of high school students and leading a classroom discussion as I did in Hungary. The class is extremely beneficial for both the students and the teacher. After all, it’s arguable that the best method of showing that you truly understand a concept is whether you can teach that concept to another person. Street Law not only gives law students an opportunity to reinforce the knowledge they already carry, but it also allows them to be active members of the community.

         As a second-year law student who is constantly engaged in the day-to-day stressors of classes and life changing around me, sometimes it is easy to forget why I originally decided to attend law school. Street Law has helped remind me of the values and aspirations I hold: wanting to positively impact the lives of others through the legal profession. One of my primary goals this semester is to assist in empowering the local youth. As always, that journey begins in the classroom.



            There is exciting news on campus.  On January 21st the SBA approved the American Civil Liberties Union of Whittier Law School as a new student organization.  We have formed the club to raise scholarship about civil liberties, to provide opportunities for students to extern and network with local affiliate and partnering law firm attorneys, and to learn about the rich history of the ACLU in the American civil rights movements.

            The ACLU defends and preserves the individual rights and liberties that the Constitution and laws of the United States guarantee everyone in this country.  These rights include: First Amendment rights; the right to equal protection under the law; the right to due process; and the right to privacy.

            The ACLU also works to extend rights to populations that have traditionally been denied their rights, including people of color, women, LGBT persons, prisoners, and persons with disabilities.

            The ACLU of Southern California in Los Angeles is the club’s local affiliate.  We will also partner with the Orange County office in Orange.  Some of the ACLU/SC’s primary areas of action are criminal justice, educational equality, freedom of speech, immigrant rights, jails project, LGBT equality and religious liberty.

            There are two Faculty Advisers to the club:  Professors Neil Cogan and Mary Ellen Gale.  Professor Cogan, while previously teaching at Southern Methodist University, for 20 years litigated dozens of freedom of speech and free exercise of religion cases.  He also served as a scholar in residence at the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division in 1980.  “Schools should have an organization that promotes careers in civil rights in the government or private sector,” Professor Cogan said.  “There is a need for law graduates to support and defend people’s constitutional rights.”  Professor Gale has been affiliated with the ACLU/SC and on the ACLU National Board of Directors for more than 20 years.  Noting the changes in civil rights over the past decades, Professor Gale said that civil liberties are “valuable now more than ever.  Since September 11th, there has been a rush to justice.  There are tensions between liberty and security.  We have to remind ourselves that civil liberties are basic values.”

            The first general meeting of the ACLU of WLS will be February 15th at 12:30.  We will then discuss forthcoming events.  The first event will include discussion of the ACLU/SC’s lawsuit against the Orange County Sheriff’s Department for forcing a Muslim woman to remove her headscarf at a pre-detention facility in violation of her right to religious freedom.

            We hope you’ll join the ACLU of WLS on its journey.

Nancy Strogoff, ACLU of WLS President – nstrogoff@sbcglobal.net


Kavi: A Spotlight on Modern Day Slavery

by Aysha Mohsin

        Did you know there is more slavery today than during the entire 400 years of the transatlantic slave trade?

        On October 27th, at 6pm in room 14, the International Law Society hosted a screening of Kavi, an Academy-award nominated short film illustrating child slavery in India. Although the film was basically about a boy, Kavi, who works with his family in a brick kiln as slaves working off a debt; the film spoke to so much more than just the trials and tribulations they faced day to day.

        Kavi and his family are made to work every day starting early in the morning in harsh weather conditions. It is extremely hot and dry and the work is hard. The film clearly depicts how much Kavi would much rather be playing cricket with the other boys but instead is working his youth away. The film builds when Kavi is approached by two mysterious men, who we later find out are working to rescue the workers in the brick kiln. These social worker-esq rescue agents reappear again at the end of the film with a document which they present to the brick kiln manager ordering him to release the workers who the manager conveniently has hidden away from view. It is at this moment that Kavi some how breaks away and is saved by the social workers.

        That is Hollywood. In actuality, the task of “rescuing” these slaves is a lot more difficult.

        After the film we had the pleasure of meeting with the Director Producer of Kavi, Greg Helvey. Helvey, not only a Student Academy Award® Winner but also Oscar Nominee, spent the evening answering questions and enlightening the crowd of what menace bonded labor really is.

        “Bonded labor, a form of slavery, often occurs when people are tricked into taking loans from creditors who have no intention of letting them repay the loan. The creditor then uses violent intimidation to keep his workers slaving with no hope of escape.”

        According to Anti-Slavery International, “A person becomes a bonded laborer when his or her labor is demanded as a means of repayment for a loan. The person is then tricked or trapped into working for very little or no pay, often for seven days a week. The value of their work is invariably greater than the original sum of money borrowed. Millions of people are held in bonded labour around the world. Bonded labor has existed for thousands of years. […] Bonded laborers are routinely threatened with and subjected to physical and sexual violence. They are kept under various forms of surveillance, in some cases by armed guards. There are very few cases where chains are actually used (although it does occur) but these constraints on the bonded laborers are every bit as real and as restricting.”

       Nico A. Gemmell, of Georgetown University stated, “Today, twenty-seven million people are enslaved throughout the world, despite the fact that in every single country, slavery is outlawed. The price of human life has decreased substantially since 1850 when the African slave trade piqued. Today an Indian child can be bought for a mere $35, an Eastern European woman for $500, and a Brazilian agricultural laborer for $100. These numbers are staggering, considering that in 1850 an African slave was nominally worth $40,000. The cost of human life has gone down because people as a commodity have become expendable. There is three times the amount of people in the world today than there were in 1850. If a slave is not useful or tries to rebel, they are killed and replaced immediately. The internet has made it vastly easier for traffickers to contact potential victims and to lure them into traps based on job and education promises.”

        National Geographics reported “In India, Pakistan, Nepal, and Bangladesh there are 15-20 million debt bondage slaves, who are forced into slavery by loan sharks who give loans with impossibly high interest rates and then demand labor as recompense. Often, the debt of one person is passed down through his children so that generations are forced into slavery.”

        So what? This is all bad, but what’s being done about it? Not as much as possible.  This sort of business is not carried out in regular markets. Still, unfortunately, many governments are not as active to prevent the spread of modern day slavery. Take for example the United States.  The US government estimates that 14,500 to 17,500 people are trafficked into the US each year to be used as slaves. Have you ever heard our government say they are taking any action to correct this?

       According to the United Nations, the International Day for the Abolition of Slavery, 2 December, recalls the date of the adoption, by the General Assembly, of the United Nations Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and of the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others (resolution 317(IV) of 2 December 1949).

       NGOs are the main driving force to combat modern day slavery. Many NGOs have dedicated their sole purpose to finding and rescuing slaves around the world. It becomes a difficult task since many times they do not have the support of the local corrupted government, because as is in many developing countries.

       Slavery being such a huge issue in India, Helvey referenced a number of organizations which he came across during the making of Kavi. Just to mention a few, Free the Slaves, Summer Volunteer Program, International Justice Mission, Not for Sale, and Tiny Stars, do work in India.

       The problem of slavery will not disappear over night. The solution to eradicating the world of slavery is to shed light on this problem and call for action to work to control over this expanding market and eventually bring freedom to all those enslaved around the world.

A Case for Public Financing of Political Campaigns

by David Mojica

           Regardless of political stripe, it seems that everyone agrees that corruption in our government is pervasive. We have seen case after case of powerful interests making donations and granting favors to politicians on both sides of the aisle. Strong financial connections exist between our public officials and influential individuals and interest groups. The only people who are free of this type of influence are the super-rich who happen to be politically inclined. We must ask ourselves whether it is fair that only the rich can afford to run for a political office without subjecting themselves to the influence of special interest groups in return for campaign funding. If we are all in agreement that we need significant change in our government, that our officials by-and-large are corrupt, that the two-party system is a polarizing and harmful element of our political system, and that more than anything we love and want to keep our representative democracy, then let’s examine how exactly our public officials get into office.

            More than anything, it takes money to become elected. How do candidates get that money? Through small private donations, yes, but large and long-running campaigns (remember that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama started their campaigns for the 2008 Presidential race in 2006) require much more money than can reasonably be expected to be gathered from small donations. It falls on contributions from labor unions, banks, pharmaceutical companies, ideological organizations such as the NRA or ACLU, corporations and other big money interests who are only concerned with what benefits them and not necessarily the best interests of society as a whole. The way to get around this is by publicly funding political campaigns, barring any campaign contributions and by strictly limiting the campaign period.

            A reasonable person may argue, “I wouldn’t want to fund anyone’s campaign. Better to put a cap on spending, but make them raise the money themselves.” This is certainly a valid point, but the problem with letting people raise the money themselves is that either they’re extremely wealthy (which leads to an elitist problem), or they’re beholden to the people who gave them the money to run (leading to unfair access, conflict of interest, and general corruption problems). But we are talking about politicians here; some level of corruption is pretty much inevitable, right? Suppose we set the limit low. For example, $40,000 maximum. The super wealthy won’t have too much of an advantage, because most people with a party backing could do that. (possibly many without it.) But do we really want to have potential candidates need party backing? Is a two-party system really a good thing? Most of us agree that it’s a polarizing and harmful element of our democracy. Isn’t it possible that even a person who couldn’t afford $40,000 could still be a good leader with strong ideas and a clear vision? Why should they be excluded from the opportunity to serve their communities in a public office? By barring private donations to political campaigns, and providing a budget to a candidate who gets say 20% of their constituents to sign a petition to get them on the ballot, we could effectively destroy the two-party system. What would that do? It’d open up the political process to the poor and disenfranchised and would make the candidates that did get elected beholden to the people who elected them rather than those who paid for their campaigns.

            Again, it is reasonable to argue that anyone serious has probably built up a following, and through dedicated fund raising could make $40,000 over a couple years for a campaign. That way the only people you would be ruling out are the people who didn’t care enough to plan ahead for their campaign. But how could a person build up a following outside of their circle of friends or family without money? The whole idea of a political campaign is to build up a following. Not only that, but why should a person have to spend “a couple of years” campaigning and raising money? If the idea is for regular people to be able to put on a run for office, don’t you think their families will go hungry when they’re fired from their jobs because they have to put all this effort into raising enough money for a run at a political office? So far we’ve only been talking, I think, about local government offices. What about a national election? At that point we’re talking about millions of dollars. If a candidate has to raise that money alone, doesn’t that open the door for special interests and lobbying groups to come buy them off? I’m proposing a system akin to the British system that only allows a short campaign period (thus requiring less money to sustain), equal opportunity for media time through publicly funded debates and allows for many parties and independent candidates to get their faces and messages out. Public funding is the way to go in order to ensure that our public officials are actually working for the public.

Intramural Stands Out

by Nick Pomponio

        For most of us, the daily hustle and bustle of law school engulfs our lives.  Every hour of the day and every week of the year are spent researching cases, writing briefs, and reviewing material.  But, for some of us at school, the Whittier Law School Intramural Club allows us to escape the mind numbing feeling of reading about Palsgraff, Miranda, and Pennoyer at least for a couple hours a week.

        The Intramural Club not only puts on sporting events such as flag football, basketball, and volleyball throughout the year, but also serves as much more for the modern day law student.  The Intramural Club allows students to meet one another and come together away from the classroom.  Through all the touchdown passes, three pointers, and corner kicks, friendships are forged, team camaraderie is built, and school spirit grows.  The events put on allow students to enjoy the outdoors and partake in friendly competition that, at least for a few moments, allows us to not worry about how many pages of reading needs to be done or how confused we all are about Con Law. 

       What seems to be everyone’s favorite event of the year, the Intramural Club hosted the Third Annual Flag Football League this past fall semester.  This year’s league was the most successful thus far and included ten very competitive teams.  The season was played over nine weeks ending in the Red Team, “Intentional Touching” winning its second consecutive championship over the Orange Team, “Touchdown My Pants.”

        After a successful fall semester, the spring semester also looks very promising.  Events that are planned thus far include basketball, soccer, dodge ball, and volleyball.  Instead of the long schedule of the flag football season, these upcoming events are planned to last one to two days each.  The idea is to allow 1Ls with an extra class and 3Ls with Early Bar Prep to dedicate more time to school, but at the same time, allow more students to participate in the events and to take a break from the daily grind of law school.

       We at the Intramural Club would like to invite everyone out to the upcoming events, regardless of your skill level, and even if you just want to come and cheer along your friends.  The more the merrier.  We hope to see everyone out on the field or court, and hopefully the Intramural Club allows you to take a break to come together with your friends and share memories outside of the classroom.