FIVE TYPES OF LEGAL ARGUMENTS feels like the sort of book a legal method/writing professor would assign their students with the express intent of assigning the reading out of order, and include an accompanying lecture to flesh out its concepts.
While Huhn does, in theory, describe the titular legal five arguments and how to use/identify them, the book suffers from a chaotic format. The author chooses to push most of the information not directly related to defining a specific term to the footnotes, which leaves the reader with a disjointed and choppy mess of a book. In some cases, the footnotes are just as long, if not longer, than the chapter they’re supposed to be accompanying. Case descriptions and judicial opinions suffer the most from this treatment, as the anything beyond the basic context is often left out of the main text entirely. Likewise, even though the book is aimed at law students, the book decides not to address how casebook authors also have biases towards legal arguments (f’ex, my Torts casebook is written by someone who emphasizes policy arguments).
Perhaps the book is meant to accompany other textbooks, rather than stand alone on its own strength, but it is difficult to recommend as-is. While useful information can be gleamed off the book, such as which arguments specific Supreme Court justices prefer in their decision making and how they might conflict with one another, FIVE LEGAL ARGUMENTS hardly constitutes a must-read for would-be lawyers. Looking up the five arguments through a search engine instead will provide the rough equivalent of the book’s material without much loss of detail and/or instruction.