You'll most likely have this assigned, or you won't be reading this...so since you have no choice in the casebook your prof is using, here's my 2 cents:

The book is DRY. Of course, contracts is not the lightest course to assimilate, but I frequently wondered why so many cases and few explanations, instead of the opposite? I'm sure it's possible to learn contract law from this, but if it weren't for the Law School Legends Contracts on tape I probably would not have remembered the dozens and dozens of cases about the same principle. Please, next time attempt READABILITY! If I were a contracts lawyer already I probably would not be buying the casebook, I'd try a treatise!

First, you must consider that a) this is a law school casebook, it's not meant to be light reading, and b) my review might be somewhat tained by the fact that I've taken a Contracts course taught by Mel (an awesome lecturer), but: this is a more clearly organized and well edited casebook than most.

The cases are well chosen and often paired in contrast to illustrate the few most common views courts have on a particular rule of Contract, usually with a full case first of the majority view and a few short "squib" cases after for emerging or fading perspectives. It's up to date with cases on electronic signatures and shrinkwrap licenses.

The commentary after each section is readable and lucid. The organization is clear -- Eisenberg himself lectured straight through the book and it made for what seemed like a solid, complete course, focusing mostly on the full-length cases. If you're planning on teaching Contracts, I'd take a good look at Mel's book.

Of all the textbooks I've ever had in law school and undergraduate classes, this book is likely the most frustating and the worst.
The entire book shows complete disregard for the fact that the book is meant to teach concepts unknown to the reader - not to provide review for those who already know. New legal terms are introduced not by telling a general meaning, but rather by including a case that uses the term repeatedly without defining it. Only after the case is there any attempt at giving a general and helpful attempt at a definition.
Also, instead of discussing neatly in a paragraph that some courts treat a rule slightly differently, the authors put many short excerpts of cases. They add little to the reader's understanding of a concept or rule - at least not any more than a one sentence comment would along with a citation. It is also very repetitive.
The authors seem to fear that writing on their own (in place of reprinting excerpts of cases) is somehow less valid or helpful to a law student. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Judges do not write opinions with the sole aim of teaching law students contract law. So to rely on them as if they did seems to be uncalled for.
For those who say this book isn't that bad, have put the bar far too low and also miss the point. There is no requirement that legal textbooks be dry, unorganized, or unhelpful. They can convey the information without playing hard-to-get by hiding things in cases and a poor format. The authors must be more interested or passionate about contract law than their book shows. Overall, this book has lists and lists of cases, but no more - suggesting no understanding of the purpose of a text book.