Although we value and exploit litigation technologies to the fullest, our trial experience has taught us that positive outcomes are not measured in computer resources, but in human resources. We understand that in complex litigation, the first objective is demonstrable virtuosity in the mastery of facts.

That mastery is the hard won product of disclplined and inquisitive thinkers who work together in a strategic ensemble. As we lead and train other professionals to explore evidence as a team, we borrow some of our techniques from the sciences and some from the arts. We use crowd sourcing and community-design organizational methods and technologies to take hold of every nuance of available information that works to the client's advantage.

At trial, knowledge of facts is worthless unless we also evolve persuasive arguments that are demonstrable from those facts. To understand the persuasive arguments in a body of evidence, we organize, we analyze, and we visualize in ways that look past the details of a case to explore the patterns and behaviors that control the facts. We cycle through many analytical models until we learn all that the evidence can teach us. We research the possibilities in the evidence as aggressively as we reject our preconceptions about it. We evolve our understanding of the evidence in a layered process of testing relationships in the evidence and probing hypotheticals with a rigorously scientific method until we achieve a simple, coherent, narrative presentation of the persuasive facts.

Through the hard labor of building fact-bound conclusions into strong arguments, we acquire an unparalleled comprehension of the best path to success at trial.

These days, anyone can find a needle in a haystack. We find the needle, and then we sew with it.