Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.
Judge do your fucking job challenge holy shit
Can you imagine just not doing your job because you saw a png of a dragon in a tie? I’d get fired in an instant! What the fuck?
Is it an ugly as shit logo? Absolutely, I hate it. But you can’t reject cases based on how ugly you find the law firm’s logo!
A long time ago I was getting a divorce and tried to file all the paperwork myself because we were both chill about it and wanted to save money. The judge rejected the first set of paperwork because it was printed on both sides of the paper. The second time I was missing a form, but the clerk would not tell me which form I was missing because that's legal advice? Ended up wasting about 20 hours of my life and hiring an attorney anyway
the judge and most likely the clerk are lawyers who have a vested interest in maintaining the profitability of being an attorney. you tried to take away their chance at buying a second boat and you must be punished
Yeah, it was in a pretty small town in the Southern US so it's almost certainly corrupt af
I call advertising shenanigans
found his website:
https://dragonlawyerspc.com/
E-commerce Lawyer
Legal online store selling legal products. Our platform integrates AI to lower the cost of legal servicesInteractive
Stay on top of your lawyer’s case performance with real-time analytics and information.
The site has an e-shop with no products in it, and a purple button that says "LAWYER" that does nothing when clicked. The links in the menu are either broken or lead to a blank placeholder page. The estate planning page lists upcoming events located at "123 Legal Ave, Suite 100, City, State, 12345" and has obviously fake testimonials from "Johnathan Smith" and "Michael Brown" giving them five star reviews.
That haircut is more unprofessional than the logo
Do you need a lawyer who also knows how to party hard on the Vegas strip?
That man is representing himself in his child custody case and failing miserably
The ridiculousness of what is considered "professional" can get really annoying, though. Like, if a nonbinary folk were in the court and introduced themself as Sock, everyone would be all over them for using an unprofessional 'nickname' in court. That's the person's name! I recently heard a similar real-life story, but I probably shouldn't share details, so the similar hypothetical is what you get. I know a person who always has colored hair who wears a "normal" wig to court because apparently self-expression is unprofessional. It's all absurd.
What's the problem? The dragon is wearing a suit and tie.
A dragon cartoon will cause people to not take this court seriously. A court thinking this and not doing their job because of it will not do the same thing.
Furthermore
I generally don't think it's unreasonable to have an expectation for professional conduct but beyond that isn't the lawyer basically marketing himself as a chatGPT grifter? It's good to curb some of this bullshit.
Lmao imagine being a Lawyer and using an AI fucking generated logo. Hahahaha
in the article they said they bought it for 20 dollars 
Wtf
Someone who does furry art for commissions definitely just had this lying around.
no this lawyer straight up bought AI slop from someone 
Are you sure it's AI? Seems like it also could've been made with a vectorial drawing sofware like Adobe Illustrator or Inkscape. I'm not seeing anything that screams "obviously AI"; but perhaps you notived something I didn't?
[Edit: I saw through another comment that their site states;
Our platform integrates AI to lower the cost of legal services
This does give more credence to your claim, but I'd still like to know what gave it away, to better spot slop in the future.]
it's the scale pattern being inconsistent amorphic blobs, the underside of the tail being on the side of the tail, and the inconsistent and asymmetrical blobbiness of the dragon's horns and eyebrow (you can even see a point where the AI couldn't decide where the eyebrow ridge ended and the pupil began)
that and general lineart weirdness a human generally wouldn't commit, like the thin line randomly coming off of the thick line on the neck pattern
Good catch, you've convinced me!
Thank goodness we have judges out there protecting the judiciary from the greatest threat it currently faces: gauche corporate branding. When Sonia Sotomoyor gets renditioned to a colonial torture prison by plainclothes DHS cops in balaclavas, at least we can trust that the solemn dignity of American legal institutions will remain intact.
I hope this guy has a wearhouse full of paper with this letterhead that he can't use now.
I don't get it, who is suing who, and who won? Is the US still land of the free or purple dragon bad?
a lawsuit filed by Mr. Perrone on behalf of an inmate who had accused jail officials in Clinton County, Mich., of being “deliberately indifferent” to her when she started vomiting last year.
In a brief order issued on Monday, Judge Kent noted that “each page of plaintiff’s complaint appears on an e-filing which is dominated by a large multicolored cartoon dragon dressed in a suit, presumably because she is represented by the law firm of ‘Dragon Lawyers PC © Award Winning Lawyers.’” “Use of this dragon cartoon logo is not only distracting, it is juvenile and impertinent,” Judge Kent wrote. “The Court is not a cartoon.”
So dragon lawyers are suing county jail for something serious (denying medical access), but the judges threw out the lawsuit because they are triggered by dragon logo?
To be fair, dragon lawyers can refile without the silly watermark
read it, it's very funny
In a brief order issued on Monday, Judge Kent noted that “each page of plaintiff’s complaint appears on an e-filing which is dominated by a large multicolored cartoon dragon dressed in a suit, presumably because she is represented by the law firm of ‘Dragon Lawyers PC © Award Winning Lawyers.’
“Use of this dragon cartoon logo is not only distracting, it is juvenile and impertinent,” Judge Kent wrote. “The Court is not a cartoon.” But Mr. Perrone, 43, also defended his use of the mythical beast as a way to market his firm. He said that he had he bought the image of the dragon in a suit for about $20 online.
“People like dragons,” he said...
Mr. Perrone, who has practiced law for 17 years, said he would not stop using the dragon, but would be more judicious about displaying it on legal filings.
“People like dragons,” he said...
okay this guy is awesome
Wait. Łamanie... praworządności...? 