Congratulations to the Participants in the Gunn Appellate Practice First-Year Appellate Advocacy Competition
Congratulations to the participants in, and the winners of, the Spring 2025 Gunn Appellate Practice First-Year Appellate Advocacy Competition. This semester’s competition was split over two nights (Wednesday and Thursday), and the competition was held on Zoom.
Please join me in congratulating all the students on their hard work and extraordinary performances.
Best Oralist:
Wednesday: Emily Payne
Thursday: Tied for Best Oralist—Savannah DeLo and Kaitlyn Stroud
Runner-up Best Oralist:
Wednesday: Mckenzie Colavecchio
Third Place:
Wednesday: Tejal Ram
Thursday: Caroline Callahan
Participants and Round Winners:
Wednesday:
- Round 1: Amanda Gershen
- Round 2 Nicholas Bragg v. Mckenzie Colavecchio (round winner)
- Round 3: Erika Leeper v. Emily Payne (round winner)
- Round 4: Jordan Spira (round winner) v. Emma Vis
- Round 5: Tejal Ram (round winner) v. Allison Brooke
Thursday:
- Round 1: Madison Vincitore (round winner) v. Sierra Shellabarger
- Round 2: Caroline Callahan (round winner) v. Michael Carastro
- Round 3: Beliz Esen (round winner) v. Jacob Weber
- Round 4: Trenton Hollis v. Jessie Biarnes (round winner)
- Round 5: Savannah DeLo (co-round winner) v. Kaitlyn Stroud (co-round winner)
- Round 6: Jack Clark v. Briana Bohn (round winner)
The First-Year Appellate Advocacy Competition has been an R&W II tradition for close to 25 years, if not more, and this spring’s competition would not have been possible without the support of our competition sponsor, Tracy Gunn. Tracy is a 1993 graduate of the College of Law, is a member of our Board of Overseers, and has an appellate practice firm in Tampa.
A special thanks goes to the judges who shared their time and expertise with the students. On Wednesday evening, thank you to Evan Dix (chief judge), John D. Arnett, and Hoyt Prindle, III. And on Thursday evening, thank you to Jeremy Bailie (chief judge), Caitlein Jammo, and Professor Feeley.
After rounds of arguments in which the judges were asking up to 15 or 16 questions in a 10-minute argument, the judges spent time providing feedback and advice. But bottom line, the judges were very impressed with all the arguments. This elite group of students took an opportunity to continue to develop their advocacy skills by participating in a competition held, for some, a month after their last oral argument. (And after their final exams.)
Congratulations, everyone!
Professor Bowman