I read Delaney's learning legal reasoning, but hardly use it, I don't brief or pay that much attention to the cases in general. Thats my least favorite book by him.
I like the crim law E&E (I like all the E&E's), I like Delaney's crim law more though-it might be how you learn that affects us, answering hypos is not a weakness, but I am have huge organizational problems and obviously that is a weakness for me-so learning how to organize information is more important to me than hypos.
To be honest I didn't use Delaney's CRIP formats that much the first time around, I think that was a mistake because my weakness on my exams I think was organization. Sounds like I should look into LEEWS.
My gut tells me we probably have different learning styles. Delaney crim law book also does a lot better at connecting the larger themes of crim law to individual cases and facts, thats the type thing that a E&E doesn't do, but is very important in distinguishing yourself from the rest of the pack. For example its one thing to say it was or wasn't forseeable, but its impressive if you realize foreseeability is more a conclusion than a mode of reasoning and you then tie the issue of forseeability to the larger purposes of crim law or torts.
However, I love E&E's, and own one for every class I have ever taken. Last semester I only did 20% of the assigned reading in my property and barely did anywork the entire semester in that class, in three days I buckled down and read and did the examples in my property E&E and got a grade that put me in the middle of the class, so I def. don't want to insult E&E's in anyway, they are a gift from God if you only have a few days to study and you have taken most of the semester off in a class.