31st Annual Uvaldo Herrara National Moot Court Competition

Competition Dates (All competition times will be in PST.)*

March 11 – 12, 2026 (Wednesday and Thursday)

Competitors are presented with a complex legal issue, often mirroring cases pending before the U.S. Supreme Court. Participants are tasked with drafting appellate briefs and delivering oral arguments before panels comprising sitting or retired judges. This competition not only hones students’ legal writing and oral advocacy skills but also fosters critical thinking and resilience under pressure. Winners are recognized with scholarships, celebrating their exceptional performance and dedication.

REGISTRATION IS NOW CLOSED

Mailing List Signup*

*List to be notified first when the 2027 competition details are available.

Registration Opens (First come, first served.) : 11/7/2025

Problem Release Date : 11/24/2025

Registration Closes : 12/12/2025

Briefs Due : 1/22/2026 by 11:59 p.m. EST

Team Check-In & Networking : 3/10/2026

Competition Dates : March 11-12, 2026


Schedule


Tuesday, March 10 | Team Check-In & Bailiff Orientation

Caesars Palace, Team Check-In (Pisa) & Bailiff Orientation (Verona)

4:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m.


Powering the Pipeline Networking Reception

6:00 p.m. - 8:00 p.m.


Wednesday, March 11 | Preliminary Rounds

Hosted by University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV)


Busses Depart Caesars Palace for UNLV Student Union (View Bus Map)

7:15 a.m.


Moot Court Teams Breakfast

7:30 a.m. – 8:30 a.m.


Moot Court Orientation

8:30 a.m. – 9:00 a.m.


1st Preliminary Round

9:30 a.m. – 10:45 p.m.

  • Room 208B – 5 v. 4 (Bailiff: Betsy)
  • Room 208C – 21 v. 2 (Bailiff: Cesar)
  • Room 209 – 9 v. 20 (Bailiff: Carlos)
  • Room 211 – 23 v. 26 (Bailiff: Emily)
  •  Room 213 – 11 v. 14 (Bailiff: Leslie)
  • Room 218 – 17 v. 12 (Bailiff: Nick)
  • Room 219 – 19 v. 18 (Bailiff: Stephanie)


1st Preliminary Round

11:00 a.m. – 12:15 p.m.

  • Room 208B – 15 v. 6 (Bailiff: Betsy)
  • Room 208C – 13 v. 16 (Bailiff: Cesar)
  • Room 209 – 25 v. 10 (Bailiff: Carlos)
  • Room 211 – 7 v. 24 (Bailiff: Emily)
  • Room 213 – 1 v. 8 (Bailiff: Leslie)
  • Room 218 – 3 v. 22 (Bailiff: Nick)


2nd Preliminary Round

1:15 p.m. – 2:30 p.m.

  • Room 208B – __ v. __ (Bailiff: Betsy)
  • Room 208C – __ v. __ (Bailiff: Cesar)
  • Room 209 – __ v. __ (Bailiff: Carlos)
  • Room 211 – __ v. __ (Bailiff: Emily)
  •  Room 213 – __ v. __ (Bailiff: Leslie)
  • Room 218 – __ v. __ (Bailiff: Nick)
  • Room 219 – __ v. __ (Bailiff: Stephanie)



2nd Preliminary Round

2:50 p.m. – 4:05 p.m.

  • Room 208B – __ v. __ (Bailiff: Betsy)
  • Room 208C – __ v. __ (Bailiff: Cesar)
  • Room 209 – __ v. __ (Bailiff: Carlos)
  • Room 211 – __ v. __ (Bailiff: Emily)
  • Room 213 – __ v. __ (Bailiff: Leslie)
  • Room 218 – __ v. __ (Bailiff: Nick)



Advancement Ceremony

4:45 p.m.


Depart UNLV for Caesars Palace

5:00 p.m.


Thursday, March 12 (Daytime) | Advancement Rounds

Depart Caesars Palace for UNLV Student Union (View Bus Map)

8:00 a.m.


Quarter Final Round

9:00 a.m. – 10:15 a.m.

  • Room 209 __ v. __ (Bailiff: Carlos)
  • Room 211 __ v. __ (Bailiff: Emily)
  • Room 213 __ v. __ (Bailiff: Leslie)
  • Room 218 __ v. __ (Bailiff: Nick)


Advancement Ceremony

10:30 a.m.


Semi-Final Round

11:00 a.m. – 12:15 p.m.

  • Room 213 __ v. __ (Bailiff: Carlos)
  • Room 218 __ v. __ (Bailiff: Emily)


Walk to Boyd Law

1:15 p.m.


Final Round at UNLV Boyd Law

2:00 p.m. – 3:15 p.m.

Thomas & Mack Moot Court Room (Bailiff: Leslie)


Depart UNLV for Caesars Palace

3:45 p.m.


Thursday, March 12 (Evening) | Awards Reception @Caesars Palace

31st Uvaldo Herrera National Moot Court Competition Awards Reception

6:00 p.m. – 9:00 p.m.


$70,000 in Scholarships for Winners Announced at the Moot Court Awards Reception


Questions? Email mootcourt@hnba.com.



Thank you to the law firm of Seyfarth for formulating the problem for our student competitors.


Many thanks to the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, William S. Boyd School of Law for hosting our competition!

Questions & Clarifications

In accordance with Rule L.4. of the Moot Court Competition rules and Procedures, the following modification are made:

Rule G.3. Oral Argument Procedure

The third sentence of the paragraph is amended as follows: In the event of a tie in the final brief scores, the Director shall determine a team’s placement based on the lower point spread in the final brief scores.

Rule I.1 Awards

Awards shall be presented to the 1st through 4th place best briefs. No distinction will be made between petitioner or respondent briefs. The awards for best briefs shall be based on the Final Brief Score. In the event of a tie in the final brief scores, the Director shall determine a team’s placement based on the lower point spread in the final brief scores. (See footnote 1). Participants are allowed to use AI tools to conduct research, e.g. Westlaw Precision, but they are prohibited from using AI tools in generating any part of the brief. All writings must be the work product of the participants, and all quotes and cites must be checked for accuracy. It is the prerogative of the Director to check briefs for AI-generated content. A brief determined to be AI-generated will result in team elimination from competition.

Question: Is the use of AI forbidden in research and writing the team’s brief?

Answer: In accordance with Rule D.2. of the Competition Rules, each team member must certify that the brief has been prepared in accordance with the rules of the competition and it represents the work product of the participants only. Participants are allowed to use AI tools to conduct research, e.g. Westlaw Precision, but they are prohibited from using AI tools in generating any part of the brief. All writings must be the work product of the participants, and all quotes and cites must be checked for accuracy. It is the prerogative of the Director to check briefs for AI-generated content. A brief determined to be AI-generated will result in team elimination from competition.

Question: Are the graders of the briefs rewarding or penalizing a particular order of the two issues?

Answer: Brief graders will not be rewarding or penalizing the order in which the issues are argued.

Question: At oral argument, does Petitioner have the prerogative to set the order of addressing the issues?

Answer: At oral argument, Petitioner may argue the issues in whatever order they choose.

Question: At oral argument, does Respondent have an obligation to follow the order of the issues set by Petitioner?

Answer: At oral argument, Respondent is not obligated to argue the issues in the same order argued by Petitioner.