This article proposes a mock oral argument exercise that can be used periodically throughout the semester to enliven undergraduate business law classrooms and guide students to higher-ordered learning and deeper understanding: pairing students to argue the two sides of actual court cases that illustrate class topics, with the remainder of the class serving as jurors. The exercise has been successfully implemented as a means of actively involving the entire class in a discussion of legal principles and giving each student a stake in the outcome of the debate, in a way that both implements education theory and satisfies business school accreditation standards. It describes a less formal exercise in which two students make short arguments in the style of a brief closing argument at trial, based on an abbreviated summary of the key facts from an actual case, applying legal principles described in the assigned reading for the day, with the remaining students serving as jurors, as a means of involving the entire class in the discussion of an illustrative application of a legal principle to a set of facts.