I work with attorneys to develop strategies and create diagrammatic exhibits that succinctly and clearly demonstrate the merits of the client’s case. And I hold my own in the witness chair under questioning.
Areas of expertise:
Typography
Trademark
Printing
Brand identity
Trade dress
Legibility
Professional practices in design
Meticulous research and analysis of every detail are key. So is the ability to effectively and efficiently use words and visuals to strengthen the lawyers’ case, make the opponents realize
the shortcomings of their position, and, if it comes to that, help convince a judge and jury.
An artist does not own a symbol rendered in an entirely different style.
Case is pending
2025
Demonstrated how the logo design process functions, including customary billing and payment practices. Detailed the differences between the plaintiff’s 20-year-old painting and the client’s new symbol, both used in logo designs. Prepared 40-page report with 18 illustrated exhibits. Deposition.
The plaintiff’s font is not irreplaceable. Designers have many similar options.
Case is pending
2024
As rebuttal to plaintiff’s expert, prepared 29-page report with 22 detailed, illustrated exhibits. Rendered opinions on the uniqueness of plaintiff’s typeface design and its relationship to marketing effectiveness of the products on which it’s used. Deposition.
There was plenty of room to make the opt-out notice larger and easier to read.
2018
Steven A. Conner DPM, PC v. Optum360, LLC
for Bock, Hatch, Lewis & Oppenheim LLP (“Class Lawyers”), Chicago, IL
Rendered opinion on the legibility of an opt-out notice on a fax from Optum 360 according to FCC “clear and conspicuous” regulations. Prepared 17-page report with five detailed exhibits. Deposition.
The designers could not have chosen a smaller, lighter version of the typeface.
2017
Davies v.
WW Grainger, Inc.
for Bock, Hatch, Lewis & Oppenheim LLP
(“Class Lawyers”), Chicago, IL
Analyzed typography and all other graphic elements in a fax from Grainger that was the subject of a class action. Prepared 18-page report with seven detailed exhibits. This four-year-old case settled soon after my report was served on the opposing party.
What might seem at first glance as if it were copied is different in every aspect: shape, proportions, color, texture, relationship of symbol to typography.
2002
Twentieth-Century Fox Film Corporation v.
Marvel Enterprises, Inc.
for Frankfurt Garbus Kurnit Klein & Selz, PC, New York
Analyzed and compared two logos point-by-point to show that the designer of defendant Marvel’s Mutant X logo did not copy Twentieth Century Fox’s X-Men logo. Prepared 40-page report with 11-page opinion and 12 exhibits. Deposition.