AllRise places law students inside real closed cases. They review authentic filings, evidence, and testimony, then argue the case as counsel on either side. The pilot launches with Enron.
Students work through a real closed case in the Case Desk. Evidence, witness statements, motions, pivotal moments. Every document is drawn from the documented record.
Then they argue it. Against AI opposing counsel. Before an AI judge whose temperament reflects the actual presiding judge. The AI does not fabricate facts.
They submit a structured reflection afterward. Their choices, their reasoning, a comparison to the actual trial counsel. Built for rubric-based grading and classroom discussion.
Cases are reconstructed from the documented record: court filings, trial transcripts, appellate opinions, and contemporaneous reporting. Where facts were disputed at trial, they are presented as disputed. Where the record is incomplete, gaps are noted. This discipline is what makes AllRise usable as a pedagogical tool rather than a fictional treatment.
Assign as preparation before the fiduciary duty unit. Students arrive with a concrete fact pattern and strategic instinct, ready for Socratic dialogue.
Assign as a capstone after covering duty of care, duty of loyalty, and the business judgment rule. Students apply doctrine under adversarial pressure.
Run in breakout groups during class. Half the room argues defense, half argues prosecution. Debrief the divergence in choices and outcomes.
Each student submits a structured reflection: their strategy, their reasoning, and a comparison to the actual trial counsel. Designed for rubric grading.
The pilot begins with United States v. Skilling, the criminal prosecution arising from the collapse of Enron Corporation.
The case sits directly on the Business Associations spine: fiduciary duties of officers and directors, the business judgment rule, corporate governance failures, the scope of honest services fraud, and the boundary between aggressive accounting and criminal conduct.
It produced the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and continues to shape how courts evaluate director oversight under Caremark and its progeny. For students, it offers something rare: a case rich enough to reward careful reading, consequential enough that the doctrine genuinely mattered.
We are selecting a limited group of Business Associations professors to run the Enron case with one of their fall 2026 sections. Pilot partners help shape the product. Their courses become our first published case studies.
Full access for your class roster for the fall 2026 term, including the Case Desk, simulation, and reflection tools.
Case background, discussion questions, rubric template, and syllabus alignment. Written for law faculty.
A dedicated channel to our team all semester. Your feedback shapes the product before the broader launch.
Your course becomes our first published case study, with full attribution and shared methodology notes.
Responses reviewed weekly · Cohort closes June 15