The Napkin Litigator
When the paperwork and the business tell different stories.
A company, property, or investment has value. But the documents and the way people have worked together leave ownership, control, or payment in dispute.
This is the focus of Napkin Litigation™, a field developed by the Lieb at Law team.
Explore the Napkin Litigation Framework™The field, in plain English
What is Napkin Litigation™?
Napkin Litigation™ examines disputes over valuable economic relationships when the evidence of who owns, controls, or should receive money is incomplete or inconsistent. Understanding the disagreement means reading the documents alongside what people contributed, received, said, and did.
The name does not mean there was only a handshake or a note on a napkin. There may be extensive paperwork. The difficulty is making sense of it together, across the areas of law that apply.
The Napkin Litigator is an editorial and educational resource for business owners, investors, professionals, and referring attorneys who want to understand these disputes.
Recognize the problem
Does any of this sound familiar?
A sale, a departure, or a request for records can expose a disagreement that has been building for years.
-
A business stake is disputed
A founder has shared profits and helped make decisions for years. When a buyer arrives, the ownership records leave that founder out.
-
Property contributions do not match title
Two people fund a property purchase and renovations. The deed names one of them, and their messages describe a different arrangement.
-
An investor cannot account for the money
An investment was meant to fund one venture. Later statements show payments to another business, with no clear explanation of who benefited.
-
Compensation changes meaning at departure
A professional accepts reduced pay in exchange for a promised share of future value. On leaving, the parties disagree about what that promise covered.
These are hypothetical examples, not client stories or conclusions about anyone’s rights. Documents and conduct must be evaluated under the applicable law.
A method for examining the dispute
Four connected phases.
The Napkin Litigation Framework™ is Lieb at Law’s method for organizing the evidence, legal analysis, and practical objectives of a dispute.
-
PHASE 1
Protect and audit
Identify what needs protection and assemble the records needed to understand the relationship and its finances.
-
PHASE 2
Test governance
Examine claimed rights and decision-making authority against both the formal record and the parties’ behavior.
-
PHASE 3
Integrate strategy
Consider how the legal issues affect one another before deciding which claims and remedies fit the dispute.
-
PHASE 4
Recover and stabilize
Evaluate what a resolution would deliver in practice, including access to money, an asset, or a workable exit.
The phases can overlap and be revisited as facts emerge. They do not guarantee a particular claim, remedy, or result.
Continue exploring
Understand the field. Examine the questions.
-
About the field and the Lieb at Law team
Read how Napkin Litigation™ developed and who is behind this educational site.
-
Read the Framework’s phases and protocols
Look more closely at the questions that organize the firm’s methodology.
-
Visit Ask the Napkin Litigator™
Explore the format for general educational questions. Do not include names, confidential information, or time-sensitive details.
For attorneys: CLE page.
Developed and taught by Lieb at Law
The team behind the field.
Andrew Lieb and the Lieb at Law litigation team developed Napkin Litigation™ from their work on disputes that cross conventional practice areas. The firm developed the Framework and teaches these issues through continuing legal education.
This site provides a place to understand the ideas and questions. For information about the firm’s legal services, visit Lieb at Law’s Napkin Litigation™ practice.
General information
This site provides general educational information, not legal advice, and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Napkin Litigation™ is not a separate cause of action or a certified practice specialty. Rights and remedies depend on the facts and applicable law. The Ask feature is not a request for representation or a way to address legal deadlines.