A recent federal court order out of Michigan is drawing attention in legal ethics circles for its unusual focus: a law firm’s use of a cartoon dragon logo in court filings. See Jane Doe No. 2 v. Clinton County, Case No. 1:25-cv-368 (Western District of Michigan). The judge struck the complaint, citing the watermark—a large, colorful image of a dragon in a business suit appearing on every page—as “juvenile and impertinent.” The lawyer, who described the image as a symbol of “aggressive representation,” has since agreed to remove it from future pleadings.
The incident is a timely reminder that while law firm branding has its place, court filings demand restraint. Visual elements in pleadings should serve a clear legal purpose, not just marketing goals. Courts are formal forums, and even creative professionals must respect the boundary between persuasive advocacy and courtroom decorum.
