Trial Format + Rules
For all Empire In-Person Competitons
Click on an option below to learn more:
Guest Witness
Does the (sometimes) scripted nature of a mock trial round get to you? Do you ever wish that your team could collaborate with ‘mockers’ from other schools?
If so, you are going to love the Guest Witness program!
The Guest Witness (GW) program pairs together an attorney and witness who attend different schools and are on different mock trial teams. The partners meet right before the round starts, and are given 20 minutes to prepare their direct. In each Empire trial, a team calls two traditional witnesses to the stand and one Guest Witness.
Keep reading and watch the video below to learn more.
Guest Witness (“GW”) 101
Your team will call 1 Guest Witness (“GW”) per trial.
KEY
P = Plaintiff / Prosecution
D = Defense
GW = Student portraying Guest Witness
-
Yes. The same student cannot serve as the GW on both sides of the case (i.e. Sally can’t play the P and D GWs).
There are no other restrictions; however, here is a quick tip:
We recommend assigning the same student to portray the plaintiff/prosecution GW in both prosecution/plaintiff trials; the same goes for the defense. Technically, you could have a different student portray the GW in each of your four rounds. But that means they’d only compete once as the GW and would be ineligible to earn an individual award. So, that is not a common or recommended practice. -
We’ll tell you. We designate the GW witness statements in the case file, and you’ll be required to call those witnesses to the stand. (e.g. Spencer Franklin in P GW and Harper Stebbins is D GW) (See Rule 2.5.1.b) You’ll then work with your students to prepare their GW directs for trial.
-
Through the PROcess software! Approximately 25 minutes before the trial is scheduled to start, we’ll release your GW assignment on PROcess. Your GW can then log-in to the software and see where to report.
-
By using a computer algorithm, which considers your team’s overall record at the competition and any potential conflicts. When we say ‘conflict’, we are referring to a situation in which your GW is direct or cross examined by the same student in both of their GW trials. The algorithm guards against that type of conflict from arising, while also trying to match top performing competition teams with one another.
To facilitate the GW program, each Empire competition features two divisions. Your GW pair will always be assigned to a trial in a different division.
The computer algorithm is part of PROcess, our digital tabulation system, and generates the fairest combination of GW assignments based on the available data at the time of assignment. The exact algorithm is published and explained in our Tabulation Manual. If you have any questions about the GW pairing, please don’t hesitate to ask! -
About 20 minutes. Their preparation takes place in the hallway outside of the trial.
-
Yes. While ‘scouting’ is not permitted at Empire (See Rule 5.11), a team may watch its GW testify. That is not considered ‘scouting’ under our rules, as the purpose is to support a student on your team, rather than to gather information on a potential future opponent (especially because your GW is testifying in the other division, so you won’t be competing directly against these teams during any of your 4 rounds).
-
Not necessarily, for two reasons.
First, a GW’s score counts toward their own team’s results and not the team for which they are testifying. So, if you direct a GW, and they “do not try their best,” then they only hurt their own team’s results.
Second, our judges are instructed to evaluate a GW directing attorney differently than other attorneys. They are informed that the GW attorney and witness attend different schools, and that the attorney should not be held accountable should the GW “freeze” or present unsatisfactory testimony that is unrelated to their attorney’s performance. They are also instructed that, should a GW perform poorly due to nerves, they should consider whether the student attorney handled the witness in a way they would expect an attorney in real life to handle a similar witness.
One final note: we have never received a report from a team that a GW didn’t try their best in a trial in the four years in which we’ve offered the program. -
Our digital tabulation software, PROcess, calculates your GW’s average score on direct and average score on cross, and ports them to your team’s ballot for the given trial. Each score is averaged to the hundredth. PROcess also deducts the GW scores from the GW that testified in your trial, who does not attend your school.
As a result, Empire differentials can often be funky! (i.e. the number of points by which you win or lose a trial) Don’t be surprised if you see a 7.5 or 8.67 differential in a round.
4 Trials
You are guaranteed to compete in four trials.
2 rounds
as
Plaintiff/Prosecution
2 rounds
as
Defense
You cannot get eliminated from the competition.
You compete in one of 2 divisions. Each division comprises half the field in the competition.
After 4 trials, the top team in each division face off in the Championship Round;
6 or 7 Students Per Trial
Each team must field either 6 or 7 different students per trial: 3 witnesses and either 3 or 4 attorneys. Teams decide whether to field 3 or 4 attorneys in a trial, which then determines whether a total of 6 or 7 students compete in a trial.
Empire cases consist of 4-5 witness statements per side. Teams will be required to call at least one witness to the stand (i.e. the Guest Witness), but will have the option of choosing at least one, sometimes two, witness character(s) they consider best suited for their case and students.
Click on one of the options below to find out more about Empire role assignments, including how the 3- or 4-person attorney structure works.
-
In designing this set of rules, our goal is simple: to ensure that teams are dividing the workload evenly amongst their attorneys. We believe that this is crucial from both an educational and competitive perspective.
As you review the rules, keep these definitions in mind:
Speech refers to the pre-trial oral argument (“POA”), opening statement or closing argument.
Exam refers to either a direct or a cross examination.
3 Attorneys
If you opt to field 3 attorneys in a trial, then the rules are easy: each attorney will be responsible for delivering one speech, one direct exam and one cross exam. There is no flexibility.
4 Attorneys
If you decide to field 4 attorneys in a trial, it gets a bit more complicated and you have more to consider:An attorney cannot perform more than one speech per side.This means that 3 of your attorneys will deliver a speech on a given side, and 1 attorney will not. Please note that this rule does not preclude an attorney from giving a speech on both the plaintiff/prosecution and the defense.
The attorney who does not give a speech must conduct one direct and one cross–no more, no less. The purpose of this rule, like the following rule, is to distribute the workload. One attorney cannot be responsible for all direct or cross examinations in exchange for not performing a speech, for instance.
Each attorney must conduct at least one exam. A speech-giving attorney may not focus solely on their speech.
No attorney may conduct more than one direct or more than one cross. You can’t have a “specialist” who handles multiple directs or multiple crosses.
The attorney delivering the pre-trial oral argument (“POA”) may not direct the Guest Witness (“GW”). This is because the GW will be preparing their direct exam with their directing attorney during the POA. Hence, it’s not physically possible for the GW directing attorney to also do the POA!
-
The timekeeper must be a rostered student. You may have an additional student who is not competing in the given round serve as a timekeeper (our preference). But you may also use one of your competing students as a timekeeper.
A person who is not on your roster may not serve as a timekeeper—so a coach, chaperone and/or family member may not timekeep. -
You may have an additional rostered student (not one of the competing attorneys/witnesses) serve as a non-testifying party representative and sit at counsel’s table during the trial. A non-testifying party representative will not be scored.
For example, our 2015 case featured a police department as a defendant in a civil action. Some defense teams elected to sit the defendant’s party representative, the Police Chief, at counsel’s table during the trial, but did not call him/her to testify.
28 Students per team
Your team may consist of up to 28 students. That means you may have 7 different students compete in each of the four trials (though this is rarely done).
A standard registration package covers a group of 14 people; this typically consists of 12 competing students and 2 coaches, although you’re free to structure your roster however you like.
Team Introductions
Representatives from your team will meet approximately 30 minutes prior to the start of your round for a Team Introduction, which will take place in your assigned courtroom. Your representatives will announce their witness lineup, complete relevant forms and show any enlarged exhibits or demonstratives to their opponent. This meeting is unrelated to the Pre-Trial Oral Argument.
Note: Teams are permitted to enlarge exhibits and create their own demonstratives subject to Rule 4.5 in our Rules of Procedure.
At Empire, we give you 8 minutes for the pre-trial oral argument and 55 minutes to present the rest of your case. You may divide that 55 minutes however you like. For instance, you may spend 5 minutes on an eye-witness direct and 10 minutes on your expert direct; or 20 minutes on your defense directs and 30 minutes on your crosses. Just make sure you stay within your 55 minutes.
Our time limits allow you the freedom to present your case in the manner that you see fit. But with great power, comes great responsibility. Students must stay alert during their trials to ensure that time isn’t misallocated. For example, if a cross takes longer than anticipated, your students will have to adapt. The ability to use your time effectively and adapt to events that occur in trial is part of what we’re looking to test.
55-Minute Trial Time Limit
-
Each student has up to eight minutes to present their argument. Any time reserved for rebuttal will be deducted from the eight minutes. Time elapsed during Presider questions is included in this time limit.
Uninterrupted time
Each party will have forty-five seconds of uninterrupted time at the start of their argument, after which the Presider will question the advocate. This uninterrupted time is included in the eight-minute time limit.
Rebuttal
The moving party may reserve up to three minutes for a rebuttal, but is not required to do so. If the moving party wishes to save time for rebuttal, they must announce to the Presider the specific amount of time they would like prior to starting their argument.
Courtesy time
Once time expires, the Court may grant each side additional time, beyond the prescribed eight minutes, in accordance with the following rules:If time is called and the moving party is in the middle of making an argument, or a judge is in the middle of asking a question, a courtesy period of up to one minute may be requested by the advocate or invoked by the Court. The Court is not required to grant the advocate’s request.
Any time that is used by the moving party during the courtesy period shall be added to the amount of time allotted for the responding party’s argument.
The responding party is given the same option of requesting a courtesy period.
Any time that is used by the responding party during the courtesy period shall be added to the amount of time allotted for the moving party’s rebuttal.
Additional courtesy time may not be granted during the moving party’s rebuttal.
-
The “clock” starts when a speech or examination begins, and ends when a speech or examination ends.
The “clock” will stop during objection arguments.
A team that runs out of time will not be permitted to present any further examinations or speeches. A judge will give a score of “0” for any unperformed examination or speech.
16 Scoring Categories
Each trial will feature 2-3 judges who will score you in 16 different categories using a 1-10 scale.
+ 1X – Pre-Trial Oral Argument (counts for double – we multiply the score by 2)
+ 2X – Speeches – opening, closing
+ 3X – Attorney on direct
+ 3X – Attorney on cross
+ 3X – Witness on direct (one of which comes from your guest witness in another trial)
+ 3X – Witness on cross (one of which comes from your guest witness in another trial)
+ 1X – “Extemp” – team’s overall ability to adapt to a trial and to raise / respond to objections
= 16 categories
-
In awarding an Extemp score, a judge will assess a team’s ability to master the following skills:
Raise timely and appropriate objections;
Respond to objections with poise;
Answer the presiding judge’s questions during the POA articulately and coherently;
Incorporate trial testimony and evidence into examinations and closings, particularly if the incorporation seems unique, extemporaneous and organic;
Rebut a substantive point made by an adversary at trial; and;
Handle adversity with poise and maturity.
We communicate to judges that a team is not required to raise objections if there are no grounds on which to raise them. Refraining from raising frivolous objections is also a part of a judge's extemp calculus. Overall, judges are encouraged to grade the students on their ability to exhibit appropriate discretion when objecting, whether that means raising germane substantive objections, or refraining from making unnecessary objections.
8 or 12 Ballot Record
Your record at Empire will be out of 8 or 12 wins.
There are three primary categories that drive a team’s record at Empire: wins (ballots captured), strength of schedule (quality of your opponents) and point differential (the margin of your wins and losses).
If 2 teams win the same number of ballots, then we’ll break the tie by looking at strength of schedule (SOS); if 2 teams have the same number of wins and SOS points, we’ll look at PD. Tied ballots are allowed and will count as ½ of a win.
-
Number of ballots captured.
Your record is based on the # of ballots (scorecards) your team wins, not “round wins.”
Ex: If you win 2 out of 3 ballots in round 1, then your record is 2-1, not 1-0.
If your Empire competition features 2 judges per round, then your record is out of 8.
4 rounds X 2 ballots per round = 8
If your Empire competition features 3 judges per round, then your record is out of 12.
4 rounds X 3 ballots per round = 12
-
Strength of your schedule.
To calculate SOS, we look at the number of ballots that your opponents have captured.
We keep a running tally of your SOS throughout the competition, which you can view.Ex: At the end of 4 rounds, you’ve faced Teams X, Y, Z and Q, who have captured 5, 7, 9 and 10 ballots, respectively. That means your total SOS is 31–the sum of their wins.
-
The margin of your wins / losses.
A 20 point win is more impressive than a 5 point win. When breaking a tie, point differential provides us with a way to reward teams with higher win margins.
We keep a running tally of your PD throughout the competition, which you can view.Ex: In Round 1, you won 2 ballots by 5 points and 10 points, respectively, and lost 1 ballot by 20 points. That means your PD is -5 (5+10-20) after Round 1.
-
Empire will use additional tie-breakers if 2 teams have identical records (after considering the above criteria).
Pre-Trial Oral Argument
Each Empire trial begins with a Pre-Trial Oral Argument (POA) that lasts approximately 8 minutes and concludes before the main trial. The POA will involve either (i) potential evidence or testimony in the main trial with the judge’s ruling determining its admissibility, or (ii) an issue involving constitutional law that shares facts with the main trial, but is not legally related to it.
Past POA Issues
Prior POA issues include argument over the following:
Admissibility of a defendant’s cell phone site location data in a federal terrorism prosecution (motion to suppress);
Admissibility of a defendant’s journal, written while in prison, in a §1983 civil rights case (motion in limine);
The right of a public university to restrict a white nationalist from speaking on campus (temporary restraining order);
Admissibility of part of an expert scientist’s opinion (Daubert motion).
Pre-Trial Oral Argument (POA) 101
-
Each side has 8 minutes for their oral argument, plus 2 minutes of courtesy time that may be granted by the Court.
Parties are given 45 seconds of uninterrupted time in which they can summarize their argument. Judges are free to ask questions after 45 seconds has expired.
-
In preparing their argument, advocates will be given the following:
Exhibit in question (where applicable);
Motion raised by the moving party;
Opposition to movant’s motion;
Relevant case law – Includes excerpts from judicial opinions.
The problem is closed universe. A team may not introduce outside statutes or case law.
-
After oral arguments, the judge will take a break no longer than 3 minutes to evaluate the presentations and weigh the legal issues.
The judge will then announce a ruling. Where the issue involves a piece of evidence in the case, the judge’s ruling will impact the admissibility of the exhibit at trial. Where the issue is unrelated to an exhibit, then the trial will simply proceed.
After the POA, Guest Witnesses (GWs) and GW directing attorneys will be asked to return to the courtroom.
-
One student from your team will present the POA prior to the start of the regular trial.
The POA Attorney is required to conduct at least one examination (a direct or cross), in addition to delivering the oral argument.
They may not direct the GW on the side in which they’re delivering the POA.
-
The POA is an intellectually rigorous part of the Empire competition, which requires students to navigate a dense set of materials and respond to intense judicial questioning. As a result, we felt that the POA should count for a larger percentage of a team’s score than a standard 10 point category. This year, each team’s POA score will be multiplied by 2. So if a student receives a 7 from a judge, it will actually contribute 14 points to a team’s ballot.
Rules & Procedures
We believe that in order to operate a competition that is educational, it is essential to have rules and procedures that are easy to understand, exhaustive and transparent. To that end, we make our competition materials available online year round, and divide our materials into three separate documents, each of which has chapters to help teams navigate their content.
Empirion
Evidence Ordinance
Lists all objections that a team may raise during the mock trial. Our evidentiary rules are very similar to the Federal Rules of Evidence, though included rules may change slightly each year based on the case.* Teams that excel at Empire have a strong grasp on these rules and their application.
*For example, we may remove the subsequent remedial measures rule if it’s not applicable to the year’s case to help make our rules more manageable for students.
Rules
of Procedure
A compilation of rules that govern court proceedings in the state of Empirion, like time limits and communication restrictions during a trial. It also explains procedures for raising rule violations that may arise before, during and after a team’s mock trial. Students are expected to be well-versed in Empirion’s procedural rules.