Final Project: Reasoning of the Law -- analysis of the thinking process and logic used by your lawyer

My attorney’s answers were to the point and I felt that his answers were very fully answered. The answers were not “legal advice” but his own side and take since he was in the industry. His thinking process was very critical, it seemed like he had to critically think about the situation and put himself in the situation before answering the legal issue. One of the legal issues was if a logo had a trademark to one of the letters and another marketing company used that letter exactly how it is displayed/designed but used the letter in a logo but did not have the same complete logo then can action be taken. He answered this issue in steps or sort of a process that had to be proven in court to win. He answered “If the competitor uses and exact letter trademark design, the original designer must first prove to the court that they properly recorded the trademark design. It will then be up to the competitor to prove that the infringing design was not stolen or copied. The competitor must show that they not intentionally steal the design. Even so, the court may award damages to the original designer or may just force the competitor to stop using the design.” As answered above, his answer was very well put together and explains the process in this type of legal situation. My lawyers thinking process by answering them as a professional seemed like it would be totally different if I went to him and actually had a case similar to the one above. I assume that if I had a case similar he would actually be taking notes down and using references and other types of sources to understand the case better to win the case.