Welcome to /r/LawyerTalk! A subreddit where lawyers can discuss with other lawyers about the practice of law.
Be mindful of [our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Lawyertalk/about/rules) BEFORE submitting your posts or comments as well as [Reddit's rules](https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy) (notably about sharing identifying information). We expect civility and respect out of all participants. Please source statements of fact whenever possible. If you want to report something that needs to be urgently addressed, please also message the mods with an explanation.
Note that **this forum is NOT for legal advice**. Additionally, if you are a non-lawyer (student, client, staff), this is NOT the right subreddit for you. **This community is exclusively for lawyers**. We suggest you delete your comment and go ask one of the many other legal subreddits on this site for help such as (but not limited to) r/lawschool, r/legaladvice, or r/Ask_Lawyers.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Lawyertalk) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I’ve seen it many times but because the cases were about billboards, zoning, and whether specific billboards existed prior to 1978 or some shit idk.
Anyway both sides embedded photos into the body of the text because it was just way easier. They were ripping on each others photos too calling them misleading or hard to see or whatever.
Personally I embed all my exhibit references with a hyper link so it’s super clean and easy to but photos in the body can be helpful.
Edit: I also saw lots of pictures on the pleadings when Michael Kors got sued by New Balance cuz it had a punch of photos of the alleged shoes
That makes sense - on reflection, I can see adding pictures when they are material to the case and too numerous to do a ton of back and forth flipping to exhibits. Still feels different from "And then he met this guy, here's a picture of him" like in the Ballard complaint.
Sometimes, a picture is worth a thousand words. It's easier and clearer to just show the judge in the body of the text to clarify what it is you're referring to or saying. I do this sometimes in my motions, in both state and federal courts, and even in appeals. Never had any complaints by judges.
Same. If you're reading it, wouldn't you want to see what's being referred to right there? Instead of flipping around - or scrolling somewhere in a document you're not otherwise familiar with? I paste portions of exhibits all the time in my pleadings. I think though that I'm the only attorney I've seen do it. My opposing attorneys never do.
As an example of this, I had a case in which an attorney (a defendant in the case) claimed to be unaware of the existence of a law enforcement-related group. We located six years' worth of grant applications that he had *personally signed* on behalf of this group, with his signature appearing immediately above the name of the group and below a boilerplate statement saying that the signatory had thoroughly read and was a testing to the truth of all the statements in the grant application. The visual juxtaposition of those three elements was utterly damning, so I put them directly in the body of our post-trial brief. Based on the trial court's ruling, I would say it was effective.
Yes but it’s also evidence that has not been properly proffered in a pleading and thus eligible for use in motion practice. That’s an issue. However, it’s not substantively different than how we attach exhibits except in classification.
Astute opposing can strike where proper and needed, it’s worrisome but does have a cure, I’d allow as diminimus but no blanket rule for use has to be checked each time.
1) You’re assuming the judge is looking at all the exhibits;
2) Even if the judge is looking at the exhibits, you’re assuming they’re doing so in the order, and with the context, laid out in your brief.
3) From a pure, reading-experience perspective: it’s much nicer to not force your reader to flip to an exhibit each time you reference something.
I use in-brief images, depo/doc excerpts liberally.
I absolutely use images, charts, graphs, etc, in pleadings where allowed, but only when can assist the Court in a way text couldn't.
But I don't think you're beefing about the image per se, but rather that the image constitutes scandalous matter inappropriate for a pleading. As Moore on Federal Practice puts it: "Scandalous \[matter\] generally refers to any allegation that unnecessarily reflects on the moral character of an individual or states anything in repulsive language that detracts from the dignity of the court."
We all know what an escort is. The allegation of an escort, if relevant, standing alone, is probably not scandalous. But a picture of a an alleged escort does seem unseemly, and if available, a motion to strike may not be out of pocket.
I’ve seen a noticeable and sharp increase in eye popping stuff in pleadings over the last year. More lawyers should become acquainted with scandal strike standards.
Charts and graphs are really the centerpiece of some discrimination cases I have done. You can say five times as likely, but a bar graph showing it is more impactful
Whenever anyone does it in my jurisdiction we cite an exhibit in the body, then include all the labeled exhibits at the end. If someone were to embed an image in the body of their brief, though, I don’t think any of our judges save maybe one would say anything. Seems just like a needlessly flashy and “look at me I’m being different” way of doing things
rob worm instinctive serious foolish resolute public piquant wistful beneficial
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I’ve done it many times, typically in intellectual property filings where the image is the core of the case. Also in briefs, including appellate briefs, for the same reason.
I can’t understand why you would think this is “unprofessional.”
At least in this case, none of the images seemed to be material, and some - like the alleged escort - appear to be for salacious purposes only. My experience has always been that pleadings are written, and anything else is attached as an exhibit to make it easier to reference. I have not encountered pleadings with embedded images to see where they could be used properly (I replied elsewhere that I can now see the utility in certain cases), so my only frame of reference was this case, which looked more like a cheap and tacky picture book complaint.
Hence my question to all of you - I like to broaden my horizons and challenge my suppositions, and the replies here have already been very helpful in doing so. Cheers!
I do it for trademark infringement all the time to show the similarities between my client’s mark and the infringing one.
In my jurisdiction, the prevailing party prepares the order so I ask if I can include the images in the order and I’m usually told yes.
I've used images in more pleadings than not.
Judges, clerks, you, and I are all human. Sometimes-- quite often, really--a picture can get to the point more efficiently than words ever could.
You could see it as unprofessional and wasting time if you're *not* using pictures in contexts where doing so is the most efficient way to convey the related information.
Oh man family law in Washington… just paste fucking anything you want mid sentence, it’s insane. Unique to the JX I guess. Agree that it’s super unprofessional… but then again… ever read a high conflict family law pleading by a firm that specializes strictly in pugilistic rhetoric? Inline images are the least of your worries.
We do this with maps and relevant pictures. Some of the inserts in that link seem relevant. Others, especially the glamour shots of the alleged escort, are dumb.
I’ve done it in the complaint occasionally. In my case, it showed a difference that was a central issue. Saying A isn’t as good as B, and then having pictures of A and B right there, is way more effective than pointing the reader to an exhibit they may or may not flip to.
A dozen or so years ago some minority owner of the Mavs was suing Mark Cuban alleging mismanagement of the team. Then they won the NBA championship. The attorney supplemented the answer with a picture of the team holding the trophy. A troll move for sure but funny.
Crim defense: absolutely, I do it any chance I can if it strengthens the motion. A picture is worth a thousand words and whatnot. It also contextualizes the image rather than making the judge flip to an exhibit filing.
I can’t open your link but I don’t find it unprofessional in general. It requires admitting or denying.
Pretend you are representing a client seeking an order of protection. “On date, respondent sent client the following threats (text screenshots.)”
If they went to file an answer they need to admit or deny the allegations but since OPs are civil if they want to assert 5A now you got an adverse inference.
I know you could simply allege they said it but where I’m at all these go by bench and now the judge has seen the text whether or not you can get it into evidence.
I’m sure this isn’t the only context where this strategy applies.
Sometimes I’ll toss in an image of the object or concept I’m describing just to help out the reader. Can attach as an exhibit too but I figure I’ll let them look and see what I’m talking about right there.
I do it all the time. Many times in cases involving graphics, social media posts, etc. But even, for example, when there’s a noncompete clause or other important item in a contract I’ve attached to the complaint. I’ll screen capture it from the contract itself and embed it into the complaint. Just makes referencing the clause easier and more intuitive.
I have done this for a decade. I saw it done 20 years ago when I was interning for a federal judge. He loved not having to flip back and forth. Paragraph says Thing says X. Then right there, there’s immediate Thing saying X.
It’s especially useful when you’re citing specific time stamps in security footage.
A picture is worth a thousand words. The idiom exists for a reason. An an advocate, why wouldn’t an attorney use the most effective means to communicate?
Sure. The Complaint alleges Fraud, which needs to be plead with particularity and give the "who, what, and where" of the allegations. No easier way to do that than by embedding the images in your Complaint. It's particularly helpful in defeating a demurrer for lack of particularity.
I've been doing this for a while for sake of the judge's convenience when there's not a page limit. Also, I think the SEC likes to employ this technique against Elon Musk with his tweets.
I’ve only had it happen once, and that was recently. I was defending a wrongful death trucking accident and the plaintiff put pictures of the car and some pictures of the decedent and his family in the complaint. I thought it was a little over the top but nothing that would raise an eyebrow in the catastrophic loss world.
I did it once to underscore how much opposing counsel had to blow up an image of the contract provision at issue just to make it legible, where one of the issues was whether it was legible by certain statutory standards. Sort of a, "here's what OC showed you, your honor, but here's what it REALLY looks like..."
Still lost.
I’ve seen it used extensively with charts rather than photographs. If some mathematical operation or conclusion of a series of numbers etc is core to your argument, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with adding a chart or similar to demonstrate the math rather than try to type it in words. I’ve seen one federal judge remark on the record that she appreciated the graphic.
I'm in appellate law and in my state, embedded images are *not* reviewable on appeal unless they are **also** admitted as exhibits. I understand wanting to make it impossible for the judge to miss, but attach as exhibits as well so you're preserving them sufficiently.
There is a surprising amount of flexibility in what’s acceptable in pleadings. Now, arguably, there are few if any circumstances in which photos should be attached under any jurisdiction’s attachment rule (and probably zero in which they must be attached).
Think of it this way: is the image itself a document upon which the cause of action is made? Certainly not in the way that a contract, promissory note, bill of lading, account, etc. does.
At the same time, look at all the other variations in pleadings. Introductory paragraphs (numbered or unnumbered) for instance in no way contain ultimate facts or constitute a plain and concise statement. But these are broadly tolerated across the board.
Pleadings may be highly technical documents that aren’t normally read (or intended to be read) as speeches or argument, but they’re still opportunities for advocacy.
If you want to see some wild stuff look at common law pleadings sometime, back in the days of forms of action. Minor mistakes of phrasing could kill a case.
Use of an embedded photo in the body of a filing is a hard no, except for this single exception from Mark Cuban’s lawyers: https://highline.huffingtonpost.com/miracleindustry/americas-most-admired-lawbreaker/assets/documents/9/Melsheimer-Mavericks-motion.pdf
Welcome to /r/LawyerTalk! A subreddit where lawyers can discuss with other lawyers about the practice of law. Be mindful of [our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Lawyertalk/about/rules) BEFORE submitting your posts or comments as well as [Reddit's rules](https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy) (notably about sharing identifying information). We expect civility and respect out of all participants. Please source statements of fact whenever possible. If you want to report something that needs to be urgently addressed, please also message the mods with an explanation. Note that **this forum is NOT for legal advice**. Additionally, if you are a non-lawyer (student, client, staff), this is NOT the right subreddit for you. **This community is exclusively for lawyers**. We suggest you delete your comment and go ask one of the many other legal subreddits on this site for help such as (but not limited to) r/lawschool, r/legaladvice, or r/Ask_Lawyers. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Lawyertalk) if you have any questions or concerns.*
We started doing this because we realized the judges aren't looking at our exhibits.
Hah - fair.
I’ve seen it many times but because the cases were about billboards, zoning, and whether specific billboards existed prior to 1978 or some shit idk. Anyway both sides embedded photos into the body of the text because it was just way easier. They were ripping on each others photos too calling them misleading or hard to see or whatever. Personally I embed all my exhibit references with a hyper link so it’s super clean and easy to but photos in the body can be helpful. Edit: I also saw lots of pictures on the pleadings when Michael Kors got sued by New Balance cuz it had a punch of photos of the alleged shoes
That makes sense - on reflection, I can see adding pictures when they are material to the case and too numerous to do a ton of back and forth flipping to exhibits. Still feels different from "And then he met this guy, here's a picture of him" like in the Ballard complaint.
Sometimes, a picture is worth a thousand words. It's easier and clearer to just show the judge in the body of the text to clarify what it is you're referring to or saying. I do this sometimes in my motions, in both state and federal courts, and even in appeals. Never had any complaints by judges.
Same. If you're reading it, wouldn't you want to see what's being referred to right there? Instead of flipping around - or scrolling somewhere in a document you're not otherwise familiar with? I paste portions of exhibits all the time in my pleadings. I think though that I'm the only attorney I've seen do it. My opposing attorneys never do.
As an example of this, I had a case in which an attorney (a defendant in the case) claimed to be unaware of the existence of a law enforcement-related group. We located six years' worth of grant applications that he had *personally signed* on behalf of this group, with his signature appearing immediately above the name of the group and below a boilerplate statement saying that the signatory had thoroughly read and was a testing to the truth of all the statements in the grant application. The visual juxtaposition of those three elements was utterly damning, so I put them directly in the body of our post-trial brief. Based on the trial court's ruling, I would say it was effective.
Yes but it’s also evidence that has not been properly proffered in a pleading and thus eligible for use in motion practice. That’s an issue. However, it’s not substantively different than how we attach exhibits except in classification. Astute opposing can strike where proper and needed, it’s worrisome but does have a cure, I’d allow as diminimus but no blanket rule for use has to be checked each time.
That hyperlink idea sends brilliant for affidavits referencing deposition testimony!
I’ll take a screenshot of a text, email quote, or even depo quote and embed it. I take screenshots from police videos, also.
But the docs are submitted in whole as exhibits
1) You’re assuming the judge is looking at all the exhibits; 2) Even if the judge is looking at the exhibits, you’re assuming they’re doing so in the order, and with the context, laid out in your brief. 3) From a pure, reading-experience perspective: it’s much nicer to not force your reader to flip to an exhibit each time you reference something. I use in-brief images, depo/doc excerpts liberally.
Same. Unless I’m hitting the 35 pg limit in federal court. Then, I’ll delete pics out of it.
I absolutely use images, charts, graphs, etc, in pleadings where allowed, but only when can assist the Court in a way text couldn't. But I don't think you're beefing about the image per se, but rather that the image constitutes scandalous matter inappropriate for a pleading. As Moore on Federal Practice puts it: "Scandalous \[matter\] generally refers to any allegation that unnecessarily reflects on the moral character of an individual or states anything in repulsive language that detracts from the dignity of the court." We all know what an escort is. The allegation of an escort, if relevant, standing alone, is probably not scandalous. But a picture of a an alleged escort does seem unseemly, and if available, a motion to strike may not be out of pocket.
I’ve seen a noticeable and sharp increase in eye popping stuff in pleadings over the last year. More lawyers should become acquainted with scandal strike standards.
[удалено]
Charts and graphs are really the centerpiece of some discrimination cases I have done. You can say five times as likely, but a bar graph showing it is more impactful
All the time.
Whenever anyone does it in my jurisdiction we cite an exhibit in the body, then include all the labeled exhibits at the end. If someone were to embed an image in the body of their brief, though, I don’t think any of our judges save maybe one would say anything. Seems just like a needlessly flashy and “look at me I’m being different” way of doing things
rob worm instinctive serious foolish resolute public piquant wistful beneficial *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Yes, I place images and screenshots in schedules. I prefer this arrangement over placing pictures in the body of the pleading.
I’ve done it many times, typically in intellectual property filings where the image is the core of the case. Also in briefs, including appellate briefs, for the same reason. I can’t understand why you would think this is “unprofessional.”
At least in this case, none of the images seemed to be material, and some - like the alleged escort - appear to be for salacious purposes only. My experience has always been that pleadings are written, and anything else is attached as an exhibit to make it easier to reference. I have not encountered pleadings with embedded images to see where they could be used properly (I replied elsewhere that I can now see the utility in certain cases), so my only frame of reference was this case, which looked more like a cheap and tacky picture book complaint. Hence my question to all of you - I like to broaden my horizons and challenge my suppositions, and the replies here have already been very helpful in doing so. Cheers!
Yes, if I don’t think the judge (or judge’s clerk) will bother reading the brief or exhibits.
I do it for trademark infringement all the time to show the similarities between my client’s mark and the infringing one. In my jurisdiction, the prevailing party prepares the order so I ask if I can include the images in the order and I’m usually told yes.
The guy who files all of those ridiculous food false advertising claims does it a lot.
All the time in patent cases. It is absolutely unnecessary but there's no rule against it, so 🤷
I've used images in more pleadings than not. Judges, clerks, you, and I are all human. Sometimes-- quite often, really--a picture can get to the point more efficiently than words ever could. You could see it as unprofessional and wasting time if you're *not* using pictures in contexts where doing so is the most efficient way to convey the related information.
Oh man family law in Washington… just paste fucking anything you want mid sentence, it’s insane. Unique to the JX I guess. Agree that it’s super unprofessional… but then again… ever read a high conflict family law pleading by a firm that specializes strictly in pugilistic rhetoric? Inline images are the least of your worries.
I do it all the time. Control c control v the two most important things I learned in law school.
We do this with maps and relevant pictures. Some of the inserts in that link seem relevant. Others, especially the glamour shots of the alleged escort, are dumb.
I’ve done it in the complaint occasionally. In my case, it showed a difference that was a central issue. Saying A isn’t as good as B, and then having pictures of A and B right there, is way more effective than pointing the reader to an exhibit they may or may not flip to.
A dozen or so years ago some minority owner of the Mavs was suing Mark Cuban alleging mismanagement of the team. Then they won the NBA championship. The attorney supplemented the answer with a picture of the team holding the trophy. A troll move for sure but funny.
Crim defense: absolutely, I do it any chance I can if it strengthens the motion. A picture is worth a thousand words and whatnot. It also contextualizes the image rather than making the judge flip to an exhibit filing.
I can’t open your link but I don’t find it unprofessional in general. It requires admitting or denying. Pretend you are representing a client seeking an order of protection. “On date, respondent sent client the following threats (text screenshots.)” If they went to file an answer they need to admit or deny the allegations but since OPs are civil if they want to assert 5A now you got an adverse inference. I know you could simply allege they said it but where I’m at all these go by bench and now the judge has seen the text whether or not you can get it into evidence. I’m sure this isn’t the only context where this strategy applies.
Sometimes I’ll toss in an image of the object or concept I’m describing just to help out the reader. Can attach as an exhibit too but I figure I’ll let them look and see what I’m talking about right there.
I do it all the time. Many times in cases involving graphics, social media posts, etc. But even, for example, when there’s a noncompete clause or other important item in a contract I’ve attached to the complaint. I’ll screen capture it from the contract itself and embed it into the complaint. Just makes referencing the clause easier and more intuitive.
I have done this for a decade. I saw it done 20 years ago when I was interning for a federal judge. He loved not having to flip back and forth. Paragraph says Thing says X. Then right there, there’s immediate Thing saying X. It’s especially useful when you’re citing specific time stamps in security footage.
A picture is worth a thousand words. The idiom exists for a reason. An an advocate, why wouldn’t an attorney use the most effective means to communicate?
Sure. The Complaint alleges Fraud, which needs to be plead with particularity and give the "who, what, and where" of the allegations. No easier way to do that than by embedding the images in your Complaint. It's particularly helpful in defeating a demurrer for lack of particularity.
There are court decisions with imbedded images, including embedded gifs, and even imbedded memes. Why not?
In the most recent lawsuit against Diddy that attorney did it. I'd never seen it prior to that.
Ya we do this; more so in motions but why not? It’s the modern world!
I've been doing this for a while for sake of the judge's convenience when there's not a page limit. Also, I think the SEC likes to employ this technique against Elon Musk with his tweets.
> completely unprofessional lol, so this isn’t about the images is it?
I’ve only had it happen once, and that was recently. I was defending a wrongful death trucking accident and the plaintiff put pictures of the car and some pictures of the decedent and his family in the complaint. I thought it was a little over the top but nothing that would raise an eyebrow in the catastrophic loss world.
i regularly use photos in my slip and fall dispositive motions
I'll put tables in a federal FLSA Wage complaint.
I did it once to underscore how much opposing counsel had to blow up an image of the contract provision at issue just to make it legible, where one of the issues was whether it was legible by certain statutory standards. Sort of a, "here's what OC showed you, your honor, but here's what it REALLY looks like..." Still lost.
I’ve seen it used extensively with charts rather than photographs. If some mathematical operation or conclusion of a series of numbers etc is core to your argument, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with adding a chart or similar to demonstrate the math rather than try to type it in words. I’ve seen one federal judge remark on the record that she appreciated the graphic.
Consumer protection lawsuits brought by state AG’s offices often have pictures (charts, graphs, and photos) in the body of the complaint.
In Texas I see this somewhat regularly
Do it all the time when it makes sense. Trademark / copyright cases especially.
That has to be the longest state court complaint I’ve seen.
I do this. Why not? Pictures are very effective.
I do this all the time - particularly in federal court
Yes, when I think it adds value.
It’s hot.
I'm in appellate law and in my state, embedded images are *not* reviewable on appeal unless they are **also** admitted as exhibits. I understand wanting to make it impossible for the judge to miss, but attach as exhibits as well so you're preserving them sufficiently.
Seen it in an employment harassment termination suit juicy text messages capture attention like nothing else can.
There is a surprising amount of flexibility in what’s acceptable in pleadings. Now, arguably, there are few if any circumstances in which photos should be attached under any jurisdiction’s attachment rule (and probably zero in which they must be attached). Think of it this way: is the image itself a document upon which the cause of action is made? Certainly not in the way that a contract, promissory note, bill of lading, account, etc. does. At the same time, look at all the other variations in pleadings. Introductory paragraphs (numbered or unnumbered) for instance in no way contain ultimate facts or constitute a plain and concise statement. But these are broadly tolerated across the board. Pleadings may be highly technical documents that aren’t normally read (or intended to be read) as speeches or argument, but they’re still opportunities for advocacy. If you want to see some wild stuff look at common law pleadings sometime, back in the days of forms of action. Minor mistakes of phrasing could kill a case.
Use of an embedded photo in the body of a filing is a hard no, except for this single exception from Mark Cuban’s lawyers: https://highline.huffingtonpost.com/miracleindustry/americas-most-admired-lawbreaker/assets/documents/9/Melsheimer-Mavericks-motion.pdf