The merits of the Problem Method of studying and teaching law, combined with a previous synopsis of the law, lie in the fact that it approximates the mental procedure that the practising attorney would follow if he were confronted with a new legal situation by a client. The similarity is too obvious to deserve much consideration.
The client's problem is the lawyer's problem which initiates the legal thought process, the lawyer's study of the facts is the induction, the lawyer's temporary opinion is the inductive inference or tentative hypothesis, the lawyer's search in the cases and the statutes for the prevailing law in his jurisdiction is the dual induction and deduction, and the true principle of law, as he sees it, is the conclusion, whether it be the prevailing principle of law or not.
— The case method of studying law by Landman, Jacob Henry. (Page 92)
This is a real "only law students know" kind of mic drop, lmao. Law is NOT taught this way. It's taught as a god model that can be changed by precedent established by cases where the facts which motivated the precedent may barely matter to your learning. It's just interesting to think about doing it another way.