--- name: academy-litigation-game-coach description: Use when a junior litigator or litigation trainee wants to build courtroom and advocacy skills through simulation-based training without client-matter risk. Orchestrates the full suite of casesim skills — judge-bench questioning, opposing-counsel modeling, witness Q&A coaching, and settlement EV analysis — into a coherent litigation coaching experience. Distinct from individual casesim skills in that it provides an end-to-end training curriculum for litigators, not just a single simulation tool. license: MIT metadata: id: academy.litigation-game-coach category: academy jurisdictions: [__multi__] priority: P3 intent: [__customer-facing__, litigation-training, simulation, junior-litigator] related: [casesim-judge-bench-perspective, casesim-opposing-counsel-simulator, casesim-client-q-and-a-prep, casesim-cross-examination-rehearsal, casesim-settlement-vs-trial-ev-calculator, academy-justinian-tutor] source: Louis — HAQQ Legal AI (github.com/sboghossian/mini-claude-for-legal) version: "1.0" --- # Litigation Game Coach — Simulation-Based Litigation Training ## When to use this Invoke when: - A junior litigator asks "how do I get better at cross-examination without real cases?" - A litigation team asks for a training curriculum for new associates - A law school or bar-prep program wants structured litigation simulation exercises - A lawyer is preparing for a specific hearing, trial, or arbitration and wants simulation-based rehearsal - A firm's professional development manager asks for structured advocacy training ## What the Litigation Game Coach does This skill is an **orchestration layer** — it brings together multiple casesim simulation skills into a coherent, progression-based litigation training program. The individual components are: | Component | Skill | What it trains | |---|---|---| | Judge bench perspective | [[casesim-judge-bench-perspective]] | Anticipating judicial questions; fixing weak arguments | | Opposing counsel simulator | [[casesim-opposing-counsel-simulator]] | Reading the other side's strategy; pre-empting attacks | | Witness Q&A prep | [[casesim-client-q-and-a-prep]] | Coaching clients through depositions and testimony | | Cross-examination rehearsal | [[casesim-cross-examination-rehearsal]] | Building cross outlines; practicing impeachment | | Settlement EV analysis | [[casesim-settlement-vs-trial-ev-calculator]] | Making principled settlement vs. trial recommendations | ## Training levels ### Level 1 — Foundation (0–2 PQE / law students) Goal: understand the basic mechanics of litigation without the pressure of a live matter. Exercises: 1. **Fact pattern intake**: receive a synthetic fact pattern (see [[casesim-fact-pattern-builder]]) and identify the key legal issues 2. **Claim structure**: draft a basic statement of claim or defense using the IRAC framework 3. **Judge bench questions (introductory)**: present the argument to Louis playing a neutral judge; receive questions; improve the argument; repeat 4. **Client Q&A fundamentals**: practice opening and closing narrative coaching with a simulated cooperative client Rubric criteria: - Issue identification: are all material legal issues spotted? - Legal reasoning: is the rule correctly stated and applied? - Argument coherence: does the advocacy flow logically? - Response to bench: does the lawyer adapt to judicial pushback? ### Level 2 — Intermediate (2–5 PQE) Goal: develop tactical litigation skills and begin strategic thinking. Exercises: 1. **Opposing-counsel playbook**: given a fact pattern, model the other side's strategy (motions, discovery tactics, settlement posture) 2. **Cross-examination plan**: draft a cross outline for a key witness; run the rehearsal with Louis playing the witness in cooperative/hostile/evasive modes 3. **Settlement negotiation**: run the EV calculator; prepare a settlement recommendation for the client 4. **Judge challenge mode**: Louis plays a skeptical or hostile bench; the lawyer must maintain composure and adapt in real time Rubric additions at this level: - Tactical awareness: does the lawyer anticipate the other side? - Cross technique: are questions leading and properly sequenced? Are impeachment moments maximized? - Settlement framing: is the EV analysis correctly structured and the recommendation well-reasoned? ### Level 3 — Advanced (5+ PQE / complex matter preparation) Goal: simulate the full arc of a dispute from intake to trial or arbitration. Exercises: 1. **Full case simulation**: multi-session exercise with judge, opposing counsel, witnesses, and settlement decision point 2. **Jurisdictional calibration**: run the same simulation for DIFC, UAE civil, Lebanese, and KSA courts — compare judicial style and strategic adjustments required 3. **Expert witness preparation**: prepare and cross an expert witness (financial, technical, medical) with Louis playing the expert 4. **Closing argument critique**: deliver a closing argument; Louis scores on structure, use of evidence, appeal to applicable law, and rhetoric ## Jurisdiction-specific calibration Different courts demand different advocacy styles. The Litigation Game Coach adjusts simulation behavior based on the chosen court: | Court / Forum | Style notes for simulation | |---|---| | DIFC Courts | English commercial court style; judges probe legal authority; persuasive precedent admissible | | ADGM Courts | Similar to DIFC; lean on ADGM Court Procedure Rules | | UAE Civil Courts (Onshore) | Code-centric; Arabic-language submissions; judges less inquisitorial; written pleadings carry more weight | | KSA Commercial Courts | Formal; Arabized; sharia-influenced underlying principles; limited oral argument | | Lebanese Courts | Civil law tradition; French-influenced procedure; oral advocacy at hearings but written submissions dominate | | ICC / DIAC / LCIA Arbitration | Arbitral procedure; panel of three; written memorials primary; oral hearing compressed | ## Scoring and progression Each session produces: - A **session score** (0–100) broken down by rubric criteria - A **weakness profile**: the two or three areas most needing work - A **next-session recommendation**: which exercise to run next for maximum growth - A **cumulative log**: over time, the coach builds a picture of the practitioner's improvement trajectory ## What the coach does not do - It does not simulate the full emotional and physical pressure of a real courtroom. Experienced practitioners know that simulation has limits. - It does not provide legal advice on the specific matter being simulated; outputs are training materials, not client deliverables. - It does not replace a supervising senior lawyer or a qualified advocacy trainer. It supplements them. ## Related skills - [[casesim-judge-bench-perspective]] - [[casesim-opposing-counsel-simulator]] - [[casesim-client-q-and-a-prep]] - [[casesim-cross-examination-rehearsal]] - [[casesim-settlement-vs-trial-ev-calculator]] - [[academy-justinian-tutor]]