Our Litigation Practice

Our litigation practice is founded on a simple premise: combine the expertise and support of a large law firm with the personalized service and value of a small firm.  Efficiency and creativity drive our litigation strategy as we focus on achieving our clients’ business, strategic and financial goals.

We litigate cases throughout the United States for clients from all over the world.  We offer the same high quality legal service and attention to all clients, whether they are individual inventors or academic institutions, start-up companies or established industry leaders.  Our litigators successfully handled intellectual property disputes in-house and in law firms, large and small.  We bring these experiences together to provide superior litigation services at a reasonable price. 

The low cost of doing business in Cleveland, Ohio enables us to offer our clients lower hourly rates compared to our competition throughout the country.  In addition, we maintain appropriately-sized teams of knowledgeable attorneys for each matter—you will never feel that your case is being handled by an ever-changing army of associates, clerks and staffers.  By quickly aligning case strategy with your objectives and focusing early on the key issues, we are able to properly and economically develop the case, often resulting in an early and favorable resolution for our clients.


Problems With The Standard "Playbook"

Few businesses like to be in litigation, either as plaintiff or defendant.  Litigation diverts attention from your real business, and it takes time and energy away from managers, engineers, IT, sales and marketing folks in addition to the financial costs of the case.  Yet, sometimes it cannot or should not be avoided.

Regardless, the real goal of litigation should be to achieve your business objectives—strategic and financial—as efficiently as possible.  So why do so many cases end up feeling like losses even when you “win”? 

Part of the problem is that court rules organize a case into chronological phases, and lawyers are trained to be logical and methodical, and the combined result is a typical litigation plan like this:

In essence, the chart above illustrates a Waterfall project management method. Tasks proceed in a structured order and, like water over falls, the case (slowly) cascades towards eventual resolution.  It is organized and methodical, and a good way to manage a big team of litigators to work up a case. 

Unfortunately, a typical structured litigation plan leaves little room for flexibility. It is hard to account for changing requirements or parameters (outcome, budget, etc.) once the case has started.  As a result, crucial (or case-ending) information or activities may not be obtained until late in the process, sometimes years after the case starts.  Such a system also tends to result in attorneys spending an excessive amount of time and money on activities that have limited utility, but are otherwise performed based on the schedule.


Our Solution

We want to achieve your objectives as quickly and efficiently as possible, so we scrapped the Waterfall method in favor of a nimble, flexible approach to litigation.  Similar to the Agile development methodology used in software etc., we perform a series of case “sprints” to develop the case: 

Each sprint is informed by the results of prior sprints and any updated case parameters (outcome, budget, etc.).  This allows us to focus on the most promising strategies and theories to achieve your goals, while discarding or downgrading others.  The ability to quickly adapt to changing conditions increases efficiencies—and reduces costs—and often facilitates quick resolution of case so that you can get back to business.



Our boutique status allows us to be creative in our non-hourly fee arrangements, which are available in select circumstances. In these situations, we are able to custom-tailor our engagements after carefully evaluating the nature, magnitude, and risks of each individual case. Such arrangements may include:

  • Contingency Fee Arrangements — Our fees are tied to a percentage of the recovery that we obtain for our client. These arrangements are most frequently used in cases in which we represent a party seeking a monetary recovery, but can also be adapted to defense-side representations under “reverse contingency” arrangements.
  • Flat Fee + Win Bonus — We are paid a fixed fee (for example, for each month or each stage of a case), but receive an agreed bonus that is tied to the results we achieve in the end.
  • Annual or Periodic Retainers — We handle a group of similar or related cases for a client in exchange for a negotiated fixed fee for a specified period of time.
  • Split Hourly + Success Bonus — We charge only a part of our hourly rates but receive a bonus based on how successful we are in achieving our client’s goals.
  • Hybrid Structures — Some combination of contingency, flat fee, or hourly terms is designed to correspond to the unique needs of the case. For example, if the case involves both affirmative claims and counterclaims, an agreement blending these approaches may be appropriate.

Many clients seek to manage their litigation budgets with greater certainty. Our flexible approach allows us to offer our clients greater predictability than may be otherwise available through an hourly billing fee structure.

For more information, contact: