Personalized drawing caters to attorneys

December 3, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

I get a lot of random e-mails related to legal products, seminars, books, etc. But this one caught my eye because of its subject – lawyer cartoons. At first I thought maybe it was going to be lawyer jokes, but it’s actually a series of drawings with cheesy phrases that you can personalize.

Now you can get your attorney father an illustration of two kids fighting in a sandbox that says “Don’t threaten me… My father is a lawyer at (your law firm name here).” Want to tell a partner at your firm that he or she is a legal eagle? You’re in luck! There’s a cartoon portraying (an out-of-date) U.S. Supreme Court with what appears to be Justice Anthony Kennedy (or Dick Cheney, close call based on the drawing) crying out for a real legal eagle, and to get (your name here) on the phone.

Other cartoons include referring to your law firm as the 9th Wonder of the World, recognizing someone as superb at closing arguments, or that someone’s going to be eaten alive by a giant tiger because the opposing party retained (your firm). As a side note, I couldn’t help but plug in Keller & Keller’s name when reading this because the cartoon is almost exactly like the commercials I see during TV judge shows in which the guy that used to be on Empty Nest and hawked Isuzu cars now wants to settle a lawsuit after finding out that Keller & Keller is involved.

Another random note: This actor, David Leisure, has appeared in at least 10 other commercials for law firms/attorneys across the country, according to IMDB.com.   

While you can customize to add your name or your law firm name, the images don’t change, so if you don’t look like the person in the cartoon, you’re out of luck. So if you’re not a white, male attorney, you’re out of luck for the “World’s Best Lawyer” cartoon. I would like to take this moment to point out that there are quite a few female attorneys, as well as accountants, doctors, and dentists. Why this company limits its “world’s best” professions including females in the drawing to just podiatrists, teachers, and nurses is beyond me. But that’s a rant best saved for another blog post.

At first, I couldn’t believe that lawyers would be interested in this type of hokey cartoon, but then I realized the majority of cartoons offered by this company are geared toward attorneys. This could mean one of two things: 1) the artist just really likes drawing cartoons about attorneys, or 2) attorneys (or attorneys’ loved ones) eat this stuff up and buy it. I’m going to go with theory number two.

Here’s the website if you’re interested, www.yournameherecartoons.com. This stuff isn’t cheap, with a 16x20 framed drawing costing $350. Take a look at the cartoons and let me know what you think. Would you give this to someone or enjoy it as a present?

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. Mr. Ricker, how foolish of you to think that by complying with the law you would be ok. Don't you know that Indiana is a state that welcomes monopolies, and that Indiana's legislature is the one entity in this state that believes monopolistic practices (such as those engaged in by Indiana Association of Beverage Retailers) make Indiana a "business-friendly" state? How can you not see this????

  2. Actually, and most strikingly, the ruling failed to address the central issue to the whole case: Namely, Black Knight/LPS, who was NEVER a party to the State court litigation, and who is under a 2013 consent judgment in Indiana (where it has stipulated to the forgery of loan documents, the ones specifically at issue in my case)never disclosed itself in State court or remediated the forged loan documents as was REQUIRED of them by the CJ. In essence, what the court is willfully ignoring, is that it is setting a precedent that the supplier of a defective product, one whom is under a consent judgment stipulating to such, and under obligation to remediate said defective product, can: 1.) Ignore the CJ 2.) Allow counsel to commit fraud on the state court 3.) Then try to hide behind Rooker Feldman doctrine as a bar to being held culpable in federal court. The problem here is the court is in direct conflict with its own ruling(s) in Johnson v. Pushpin Holdings & Iqbal- 780 F.3d 728, at 730 “What Johnson adds - what the defendants in this suit have failed to appreciate—is that federal courts retain jurisdiction to award damages for fraud that imposes extrajudicial injury. The Supreme Court drew that very line in Exxon Mobil ... Iqbal alleges that the defendants conducted a racketeering enterprise that predates the state court’s judgments ...but Exxon Mobil shows that the Rooker Feldman doctrine asks what injury the plaintiff asks the federal court to redress, not whether the injury is “intertwined” with something else …Because Iqbal seeks damages for activity that (he alleges) predates the state litigation and caused injury independently of it, the Rooker-Feldman doctrine does not block this suit. It must be reinstated.” So, as I already noted to others, I now have the chance to bring my case to SCOTUS; the ruling by Wood & Posner is flawed on numerous levels,BUT most troubling is the fact that the authors KNOW it's a flawed ruling and choose to ignore the flaws for one simple reason: The courts have decided to agree with former AG Eric Holder that national banks "Are too big to fail" and must win at any cost-even that of due process, case precedent, & the truth....Let's see if SCOTUS wants a bite at the apple.

  3. I am in NJ & just found out that there is a judgment against me in an action by Driver's Solutions LLC in IN. I was never served with any Court pleadings, etc. and the only thing that I can find out is that they were using an old Staten Island NY address for me. I have been in NJ for over 20 years and cannot get any response from Drivers Solutions in IN. They have a different lawyer now. I need to get this vacated or stopped - it is now almost double & at 18%. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

  4. I am in NJ & just found out that there is a judgment against me in an action by Driver's Solutions LLC in IN. I was never served with any Court pleadings, etc. and the only thing that I can find out is that they were using an old Staten Island NY address for me. I have been in NJ for over 20 years and cannot get any response from Drivers Solutions in IN. They have a different lawyer now. I need to get this vacated or stopped - it is now almost double & at 18%. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

  5. Please I need help with my class action lawsuits, im currently in pro-se and im having hard time findiNG A LAWYER TO ASSIST ME

ADVERTISEMENT