Thursday, February 19, 2026
Team Finished #3 Out of 191 Teams from 121 Schools
Preparation paid off for the team of who beat Harvard Law School in the held last month in New York City.
Observers called the upset victory a 鈥淐inderella story.鈥� It occurred in the octofinal
round among 16 teams, just before the quarterfinals. The Harvard team was the second-seed.
UNT Dallas College of Law 3L students Hamilton Hayers (left), Victoria Saucedo and Andrew Brown at the National Moot Court Competition
The three-person UNT Dallas team of Hamilton Hayers, Victoria Saucedo and Andrew Brown prevailed on both brief and oral argument, winning by nine points. They eventually advanced to the semifinal round, which concluded with a three-point decision in favor of Texas Tech University.
Out of 191 teams competing from 121 schools nationwide, UNT Dallas College of Law team placed third.
Hayers said teamwork was central to managing the scope of the competition鈥檚 challenges.鈥淭his competition required significantly more research and writing than a typical moot court problem,鈥� Hayers said. 鈥淲orking closely as a team allowed us to produce a brief that reflected our collective effort.鈥�
The New York City courtroom Where law school teams make arguments in the National Moot Court Competition
The annual event is one of the nation鈥檚 longest-running inter-law school advocacy programs. Hosted annually by the New York City Bar Association in partnership with the American College of Trial Lawyers, the competition brings together law schools from across the country in a process designed to mirror appellate practice. Students analyze a record on appeal, draft formal briefs and present oral arguments before panels of attorneys and judges.
Preparation began months in advance and centered on a structured, team-based approach to research, writing and practice. Saucedo said the group prioritized precision, repetition and accountability throughout the process. 鈥淥ur preparation started with drafting and refining the brief as a team,鈥� Saucedo said. 鈥淲e read it line by line, challenged each other鈥檚 reasoning and built a consistent practice schedule. Feedback was part of every stage.鈥�
Schools participating in the competition advanced from regional rounds to national
competition through successive stages of written and oral advocacy. The UNT Dallas
team progressed through those rounds to reach the semifinal stage.
Judges listen and take notes during the National Moot Court Competition
Saucedo said the national rounds required adaptability as much as preparation. 鈥淭he strongest rounds were the ones where we adjusted in real time to what the judges were asking,鈥� she said. 鈥淲e trusted the process we built and stayed disciplined in how we approached each argument.鈥�
For Brown, the experience underscored the connection between moot court and preparation for legal practice, particularly in litigation. 鈥淢oot court provides an opportunity to engage deeply with legal issues, develop persuasive arguments and work collaboratively toward a shared goal,鈥� Brown said. 鈥淭hose experiences translate directly to practice.鈥�
He pointed to the team鈥檚 semifinal win at the regional competition in Houston as a defining moment in their development. 鈥淲e advanced because of the work that went into our brief and the collaboration behind it,鈥� Brown said. 鈥淚t showed the value of preparation and teamwork before we even stepped into the oral rounds.鈥�
The experience also strengthened the team鈥檚 research and writing process, including expanded use of scholarly sources, structured editing and candid peer feedback. Participation in the competition reflects the role of moot court in legal education by providing practical training in appellate advocacy, legal writing and preparation for the profession.
From 鈥� Featured Law News