One way to reduce the cognitive load students feel during instruction is to change the way content is delivered. This can be achieved by optimising the instructional sequence and providing sufficient instructional support during problem-solving. However, the literature is unclear regarding whether an inductive or a deductive instructional sequence is best for processing information. Using an experimental research design, this study compares a problem solving-first inductive sequence to a more traditional direct instruction-first deductive instructional sequence in legal sciences by introducing worked-examples in the process of legal case-solving. The participants were graduate legal students who were divided into two groups and given either an inductive or deductive instructional sequence of activities. The results showed that participants in the problem-solving-first inductive sequence performed better in all three dimensions of legal evaluation. This study demonstrates the efficacy of a problem-solving-first inductive sequence on students' ability to process legal cases.