|
TOPIC: "Interstate Placement: Challenges to Timely Permanency"
March 13 & 14, 2009
Columbus, Ohio

2009 AWARDS/RESULTS
view competition photos
NATIONAL CHAMPIONS
 |
Team 06: Northern Kentucky University - Salmon P. Chase College of Law
Team Members: Christen Steimle, Danielle Ravencraft, Brad Gibson
Best Oralist Final Round: Danielle Ravencraft |
| |
|
Karen Greenberg, Christen Steimle, Danielle Ravencraft, Dean Jack Guttenberg, LaShanda Taylor, Esq.
Finalists
- Team 06: Northern Kentucky University - Salmon P. Chase College of Law
Team Members: Christen Steimle, Danielle Ravencraft, Brad Gibson
- Team 19: Loyola University Chicago School of Law
Team Members: Lauren Rafferty, Clay Rehrig
Semi Finalists
- Team 09: Loyola University Chicago School of Law
Team Members: Conor Fleming, Michele Roulbet
- Team 14: Seton Hall School of Law
Team Members: Michael R. Hogg, Anurima Ray
Best Briefs
- Team 12: Northern Kentucky University - Salmon P. Chase College of Law
Team Members: Angel Zachel, Brooklyn Franklin, Isaac Burkhart
- Team 20: University of San Diego School of Law
Team Members: Marshall Skaletsky, Courtney Randall
- Team 06: Northern Kentucky University - Salmon P. Chase College of Law
Team Members: Christen Steimle, Danielle Ravencraft, Brad Gibson
Best Oralists, Day One:
- Amy Gill, University of Cincinnati
- Michele Roulbet, Loyola University Chicago School of Law
- Michael R. Hogg, Seton Hall School of Law

FINAL ROUND JUDGE PANEL
Presiding Judge: Honorable Maureen O’Connor
Justice, Supreme Court of Ohio
Professor Gerard F. Glynn
Representative of the National Association of Counsel for Children (NACC)
Director of
Clinical Programs and Associate Professor of Law
Barry University, Dwayne O. Andreas School of Law
LaShanda Taylor, Esq.
ABA Center on Children and the Law Staff Attorney
Karen Greenberg
President of the American Academy of Adoption Attorneys
Attorney, Konowitz and Greenberg, P.C.
TESTIMONIALS
“It was fun to argue in the Statehouse and the Supreme Court.” – participant
“Well organized!” – participant
“The judges gave very useful critiques.” – participant
“I was impressed by how smoothly the competition went.” – faculty advisor/coach
“Very good and engaging issues.” – attorney/judge
“I was impressed with the organization and the excellent problem!” – attorney/judge
“The materials were outstanding. The problem was great and instructions to judges could not [have been] better.” – attorney/judge
|