I tap my foot nervously on the vinyl floor. The sharp sound is quiet compared to the bustle of the classroom that has been refashioned into a courtroom only minutes before. In spite of the auditory contrast, however, somehow my restlessness matches that of my peers around me. Some are tense, while others are ecstatic, bubbling over with energy. I sit among the defense team, pouring over any potential holes in my closing statement. Both clusters of lawyers are scrambling to make last-minute revisions and confer with their witnesses; each cis a fiery whorl of dialogue. Finally Judge Nelson hushes the crowd, declaring, “We will begin with an opening statement from the plaintiff team.”
_______
In the week before Spring Break, English 10 (myself included) held mock trials as a part of their unit on A Doll’s House by Henrik Ibsen. The morality play is set in 19th century Norway and follows the unraveling of the marriage of Nora and Torvald Helmer. The play’s original setting was modified to modern-day New Jersey for various legal conveniences. The scenario takes place four months after Nora’s departure from the Helmer household. Since then, in the 2022 adaptation, she has secured a job as a secretary and is renting an apartment in town. With her newfound stability and financial independence, Nora asks for returned custody over her three children.
The true-to-life mock trials allowed sophomores to apply what they learned in class to the fictional court case Helmer v. Helmer. The plaintiff-side represented Nora Helmer, and the defendants represented Torvald Helmer. The class of 2024 debated which parent should have custody of the three children by preparing for the civil case weeks in advance. The class prepared four mock trials in total, giving students the chance to take on dual roles of lawyer and of witness or juror.
In the first mock trial, the plaintiff-side utilized vital facts to support their argument that Nora is better suited to being a parent because she cares deeply for her children. It was also discussed whether Torvald even cared about the kids by citing his infrequent interaction with them. The final nail in Torvald’s coffin was his past manipulative behavior in his marriage.
Ultimately, the legal battle ended in Nora’s favor. Although Torvald appeared to be better suited as a guardian financially, juror Lavanya Seshasayee ’24 reasoned, “Nora loves her children and can nurture them better than Torvald.” She concluded her statement by saying, “The only thing that Torvald has is financial stability, which Nora has been working towards.”
Win or lose, this assignment allows students to build core skills pertinent to a greater scope than solely the legal sphere. As a defendant myself, the defeat was a humbling experience. Taking a step back, I realize we neglected to reference crucial statistics that could have potentially created a stronger case. Overall, though, I feel incredibly proud of myself and the sophomore class for participating in an activity of collaboration, critical thinking, and discussion.
