Pro se veterans might find this competition interesting.

Hosts:

• THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS BAR ASSOCIATION
• THE GEORGE WASHINGTON LAW SCHOOL
• THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS

Using cases that look real, and with “dummy” medical records in the joint appendix pdf, teams of law students write briefs covering one side of a case (the Petitioner or Respondents) on a Competition Problem but must be able to give oral arguments–with no visual aids etc–for both sides. Briefs are scored on 100 points (official rules, D.) 

The 2013 problem and team briefs is about VA physician negligence are here.

When:  Saturday, November 16, 2013, and Sunday, November 17, 2013.  Where: Washington, D. C. Building? All rounds are open to observation to the public and recorded.  I don’t find any previous competitions on Youtube.

Judges’ Criteria (excerpts) 

1. . Command of the Issues. “…how well each team member understands the issues presented in the problem and his or her knowledge of the facts and relevant law, including an ability to identify and finesse fine distinctions.
2.. Organization and Reasoning. ” …to what extent a team member presents a coherent and logical argument that flows smoothly and addresses all necessary points.”

3. Ability to Answer Questions. ” …her ability to interact with the Court. The Judges will evaluate how well each participant answers individual questions, including whether the answers are responsive, comprehensive, and supported by authority, and whether each
participant transitions easily from questions into the planned presentation.
4. Persuasiveness. ” …on the overall persuasiveness of the argument and whether the participant presents his or her position with conviction.
5. Deference and Courtroom Manner.  “…will evaluate the poise and
confidence of each participant, including the ability to maintain eye contact with
panel members and quality of inflection. The Judges will also consider whether
each participant comports with courtroom decorum (e.g., by addressing each
Judge as “Your Honor” and deferring to Judges as they speak).

Update; Thanks to John D for pointing out that the cases and evidence are simulated.  This is backed up by the sentences in the About tab.  Had me worried.