This might be strange, but in my Civ Pro class we haven't read any cases yet, nor have we even gone over the specific rules. We've gone through the basic timeline/life of a case. But since it's a full-year class, my prof wants to spend a good portion of this semester teaching skills in addition to substantive knowledge. He's giving us a sort of introduction to legal reasoning and litigation strategy. The other week, he gave us some problems to analyze and work through in class by Socratic discussion. One dealt with who gets ownership of a buffalo carcass on a hunt; the other dealt with encroachment on a neighbor's land in building a garage. In class we went through the significance of how the question of law is framed, the various kinds of remedies that could be devised, the various policy arguments for and against each rule/policy, etc. The big point was to get us to see that usually, there's a lot of different ways a dispute can be resolved; if you can see past the two most obvious resolutions of a case, you can usually gain an advantage. Same deal when it comes to framing the issue of law: the answer/outcome depends as much on how you ask/frame the question as it does on the actual rules and authorities. It's actually rather interesting. And best of all: light on reading, heavy on thinking.