Omar Ha-Redeye participated in the Cherniak Cup, UWO Law’s trial advocacy competition.

During the past week, Omar Ha-Redeye volunteered his time to play the role of a witness/client during law school competitions.

On Nov. 19, he played a witness for the finals in the Cherniak Cup.  Chief Justice Helen A. Rady of the Superior Court of Justice in n judged the competition, and mentioned to Omar during the reception that followed that based on his performance he should consider a career in acting.  Quite often though there is not much of a difference between a lawyer and an actor when they are advocating before the court.

On Nov. 20, he was a client for the BLG Client Counseling Competition, a role he played because he won the competition last year.  As a distraught client he broke down and cried three times for the finalists.  The last time he actually produced real tears.  The competition was won by Daliana Coban and Pamela Vlasic, who will represent UWO at the ABA Regional Competition in Feb. 2009.

Competition director Prof. Erika Chamberlain said,

This is a highly important practical skill – regardless of practice area. Lawyers must be able to interact with clients and make them feel confident that the lawyer will meet their needs.

One of the BLG lawyers that observed this also said later in the evening, with no foreknowledge of Rady J.’s statement the night before, that acting might be a promising option.

Could law school be the new prep school for actors?

Omar Ha-Redeye participated in the Cherniak Cup Trial Advocacy competition at UWO. The competition is Western’s only trial advocacy competition.

A hypothetical fact situation is presented to the participants, who pair off in teams. Witnesses are examined and cross-examined, and each participant provides either an opening or closing statement. The competition is judged by practicing lawyers or real judges.

Omar Ha-Redeye teamed up with Lawrence Gridin, who was one of the finalists last year, and as a result represented Western in the 2008 OTLA Cup in Ottawa, sponsored by Doucet McBride LLP and Cooligan Ryan LLP.

The fact scenario this year involved in a plaintiff that went bungee jumping with his corporate peers.  He violated a number of the safety rules, including participation with a precluded medical condition (hypertension) and failing to extend the arms during the jump.  He also drank some alcohol prior to the jump, which was contraindicated by his allergy medications, and signed a waiver.

The bungee operator however had a history of violating the safety code.  In this specific instance, an automated machine indicated that the time between jumps had been reduced by the operator.  The time is what allowed the cord to retract to its original length, providing adequate elasticity.  The plaintiff in this case fell through the water to the rocks below, suffering a serious neck injury.

Omar did the examination-in-chief and closing statements for the event.