Many legal briefs resemble medieval manuscripts—dense, austere, and allergic to imagery. Illustrations appear mostly in patent cases, where a circuit diagram or a sectional view can seem mandatory rather than inspired. Yet visuals shouldn’t be confined to the technocratic side of litigation. The law traffics in relationships—chronological, causal, hierarchical—that words often strain to display. A timeline of events or a chart of corporate ownership can instantly render transparent what dozens of clauses obscure. Judges, clerks, and readers are human; they grasp patterns faster when shown than when told.
Visuals also heighten persuasion by creating rhythm and emphasis. Rhetoricians have long known that any rupture in a pattern draws the eye and sharpens attention: in a sea of text, an image is the visual equivalent of a raised eyebrow. The principle is aesthetic as well as psychological—variation itself produces significance. When used judiciously, a chart or diagram serves as a strategic pause, giving the argument both relief and resonance.
Finally, the illustrated brief acknowledges a modern truth: attention is the new scarcity. To capture it, lawyers must borrow from design as much as from doctrine. A well-spaced visual is not ornament but economy—a gesture of respect toward the reader’s limited patience. Law’s authority may rest on words, but its persuasion increasingly depends on the art of showing as well as saying.