I think it's inappropriate, but especially so in a criminal case. Briefs aren't a chance to show off how clever and funny we can be, they're a chance to advocate for a legal position that will affect a real person's life. While briefs like this might make me laugh as an observer, I can't help but think how I'd feel if I was the client and saw this was how seriously my attorneys took my case.
Posts: 1116 | Location: Waxahachie | Registered: December 09, 2004
I tend to agree with Andrea. While I might embroider a presentation in an effort to make it engaging, I think the potential for such a technique to go over like a lead balloon is far too great. I do appreciate that sometimes form can help better convey a particular point. And there might be a few rare circumstances where message and medium combine to allow that kind of presentation. But I feel they would be so few and far between that I'm not going to spend a lot of time working on my inking skills. Most I'll do is get creative with a footnote, and even on that I've gotten burned.
Originally posted by AndreaW: I think it's inappropriate, but especially so in a criminal case. Briefs aren't a chance to show off how clever and funny we can be, they're a chance to advocate for a legal position that will affect a real person's life. While briefs like this might make me laugh as an observer, I can't help but think how I'd feel if I was the client and saw this was how seriously my attorneys took my case.
Since this was an amicus brief submitted by, essentially, a pro-se attorney, I don't think the client had any objections as to form :P
And because it was an amicus brief, he was at greater liberty to take a crack at the court's briefing limitations. THAT seemed to be the larger point of the cartoon.
Posts: 2432 | Location: TDCAA | Registered: March 08, 2002
Originally posted by Shannon Edmonds: And because it was an amicus brief, he was at greater liberty to take a crack at the court's briefing limitations. THAT seemed to be the larger point of the cartoon.
Oh yeah, he zinged 'em. He showed that he believed his entire substantive argument could be made in a grand total of 74 speech bubbles. And that includes the ones with such scintillating arguments as "Yup" and "You got it!" In the future, I think I'd just give this particular attorney one page, as he obviously doesn't need any more than that if he can waste his pages with drawings instead of argument.
Posts: 1116 | Location: Waxahachie | Registered: December 09, 2004
Well, I think we may be missing the point. The literary world has seen the need for comic book versions of literary classics for the more, ah, reading challenged demographic. I've run into more than a couple of attorneys in this demographic...
Posts: 2138 | Location: McKinney, Texas, USA | Registered: February 15, 2001
Why not a pop-up brief, then? Pull this tab and see how Brooks merges factual sufficiency review with legal sufficiency review. Or a constable in pops out of a carriage when you discuss U.S. v. Jones?
Newell, there's too much hassle involved with mime. Think of the time on the makeup, and that grease paint gets everywhere. You'll be finding little white flecks everywhere.
Posts: 1116 | Location: Waxahachie | Registered: December 09, 2004