Using Graphics In Insurance Litigation: Turning Volume Into Clarity

Trials today are more visual than ever, and juries expect the same clarity they get from the media they consume daily. For litigators, especially in insurance disputes with their endless exhibits and dense policy language, the challenge is not whether to use graphics but how to use them effectively, credibly, and strategically to make the case intelligible to the trier of fact.

From Paper to Clarity

Insurance matters are rarely light on documentation. Policies, endorsements, claim files, expert reports, and correspondence can stretch into thousands of pages. The real task for counsel is not producing the largest record but telling the clearest story. Judges and juries must be able to cut through complex contracts and fact-heavy disputes to reach decisions that are both fair and comprehensible.

That is where graphics matter. Done well, visuals transform overwhelming records into clarity. They focus attention, highlight key points, and simplify complex policy language. In a field where both comprehension and credibility drive outcomes, graphics are a vital tool for organizing a case and guiding the triers of fact.

From Volume to Visuals

Insurance disputes generate massive records where every claim file, rider, endorsement, and email can be discoverable and contested. No jury—or judge—can retain that scale unaided. Graphics offer a way to collapse reams of material into digestible formats: summary charts distill thousands of pages into a few core data points, while spreadsheets become single-page visuals that capture premium payments, claim adjustments, or loss runs. Instead of flipping through binders, jurors see a structured map of what matters.

Equally important, visuals make dense contracts navigable. Clauses, exclusions, and endorsements often span multiple pages, and jurors may have no context for how to read them. A well-designed graphic can walk them through coverage clauses step by step, while callouts spotlight the exact language at issue without overwhelming them. Timelines, particularly in bad-faith cases, allow jurors to instantly see whether a delay was routine or unreasonable.

Building a Narrative

Jurors remember stories, not technicalities. Graphics can transform records into narratives with characters, conflicts, and key points. Attorneys can reframe the dispute: Who said what? When? How did the insurer respond? What changed along the way? The facts remain the same, but the framing moves jurors from confusion to clarity.

This also strengthens expert testimony. Experts in insurance matters, whether actuaries, engineers, or claims handlers, are often indispensable, but their analysis risks becoming impenetrable. Graphics help them slow down and translate specialized concepts into common-sense visuals. A damages chart, a coverage comparison, or an overlay of industry standards on a timeline can mean the difference between jurors leaning in or tuning out.

Equally, graphics sustain engagement. Jurors cannot absorb dense paper exhibits for hours on end. Well-timed visuals create rhythm, signal importance, and reduce fatigue, helping jurors stay focused on what truly matters.

Strategic Use Across the Case

The impact of graphics extend beyond the trial. In mediation, a single demonstrative can show the other side how a jury will see the case, encouraging resolution. At trial, graphics sharpen openings, anchor expert testimony, and frame closings. On appeal, they distill complex records into clear takeaways for appellate judges. At every stage, graphics are not mere illustrations—they are persuasive tools.

The Lesson of Starr Indemnity & Liability Co. v. Monte Carlo, LLC

The case of Starr Indem. & Liab. Co. v Monte Carlo, LLC. et al. (Supreme Ct., New York County Index No. 651045/2013)  illustrates how clarity can prevail when records threaten to overwhelm. The dispute involved multiple insurers, overlapping layers of coverage, and a tangle of communications arising from property damage claims. The record stretched across thousands of pages, with the key issues hinging on policy interpretation and claims-handling conduct.

What made the difference was not volume but organization and visualization. Instead of reciting dates and documents, the litigation team used graphics to map how communications unfolded, to clarify the interplay among policies, and to condense vast records into digestible summaries. This allowed the fact finders to see both the sequence of events and the relevant policies without getting lost in the paperwork.

By framing the case visually, Farrell Fritz's defense counsel simplified complex policy analysis while underscoring the consistency of their position. Clear presentation bolstered credibility, demonstrating to the jury that the team had mastered the complexity rather than contributed to it. The case underscores a broader truth: in document-heavy insurance disputes, the winning side is often the one that helps decision-makers see both the forest and the trees.

A Practical Checklist

For litigators, the question is not whether to use graphics, but how to use them responsibly. Five guideposts stand out:

1. Is the visual tied directly to evidence in the record?
2. Does it summarize without being misleading?
3. Is it tailored to explain, persuade, or compare?
4. Will it be most effective at mediation, trial, or appeal?
5. Does it keep jurors engaged rather than fatigued?

A disciplined approach ensures that graphics support the case rather than distract from it.

In the end, insurance litigation is about clarity in the face of volume. The side that organizes the evidence into a coherent story is the side most likely to win. Graphics make that possible: they distill complexity, reinforce expert testimony, and keep triers of fact engaged from start to finish. Treating visuals as central to strategy, not as an afterthought, is what turns paper-heavy disputes into compelling, winnable cases.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.