I would suggest Dolly from Underware.

George Triantafyllakos - backpacker.gr

Or
Fedra Serif A (or Fedra Serif B). And a matching sans is available too, if you need it, Fedra Sans.
http://www.typotheque.com/fonts/fedra_serif_a/

Have you thought about FF Absara?

Yes, Fedra is a better suggestion.

ITC Stone Serif with oldstyle figures (from ITC, not Adobe) is a tremendous workhorse that blooms at 9pt, whereas others mentioned here bloom more at 10pt. And it’s very crisp, fairly high contrast, with a large x-height, available in three weights. Dolly, Absara, and Fedra are way too informal, even cute. Stone Serif (use its matching Stone Sans as a sidebar) is just right for a law firm, even aggressively right. Or, Warnock Pro from Adobe.

>I’m looking for something very modern but with a lot of human touch.

@MondoB
This says to me marcinpetrus is searching for s.th. “cute” that could work properly for running text. Dolly and Fedra are in that grid in my opinion. Stone Serif and Warnock not.

What is just right for a law firm? Maybe this is the difference between european and american style preferences – to be polemic; Netherlands vs Engravers MT.

And Fedra is huge. It contains additionally cyrillic, CE and all the stuff marcinpetrus maybe needs, the guy is from poland.

Dolly has only two weights, and no bold italic, whereas Fedra Serif and Absara are fully equipped. Here in New York, however, those options would never stand a chance with the client, whatever the designer thought of them. They would work for a non-profit agency, though, and for those clients I have used all three at different times.

Any font for all-purpose law firm use absolutely, positively needs lining figures, not old style figures, as the default, not merely accessible via opentype advanced features. Any law firm needs a font that will work with Microsoft Word or WordPerfect, instead of requiring InDesign. That means that Dolly and Fedra are out. They’re both too unusual, anyway, and there’s something not quite right about Dolly’s bold.

Stone Serif might work, but I’m not familiar enough with it. Linotype Sabon is ok. Monotype Sabon is too light. Sabon Next and Le Monde Livre are in general very good, but Porchez likes weird pilcrows (Paragraph signs) for some unknown reason, and that might be a dealbreaker for LML and SN (SN has good pilcrows, but only in its small cap set). Linotype Sabon is a little bit too light, but is good otherwise. SN and LML are just about a perfect darkness for law firm use. Abrams Augereau is also very good, but also has a problem with the pilcrow. What’s with these weird pilcrows in Garamond revivals, anyway?

You may think that it’s odd for me to be so concerned with the pilcrow (paragraph sign), but whereas, in general, it’s little used, in legal work it’s used a lot (although that varies with the type of law practice)

Palatino is quite decent, but it may be too common for branding purposes. Or not. 99% of law firms use Times New Roman or similar, and nothing else. Lawyers don’t normally ever see Palatino. And it has a nice, conventional pilcrow.

A law firm will almost never use anything as small as 9 point, except maybe in parts of contracts intentionally aimed at being hard to read.

Miller, Escrow, and assorted variants of Century are quite good, IMO, but may seem too old-fashioned for someone who wants something “very modern.”

Meridien is good, except the regular is a little bit too light, and the medium a little bit too dark (and not a big enough contrast with the bold).

I’d be inclined to recommend going with Palatino. It’s quite good for many uses, and has the advantage of being “free.”

Kingfisher would be a really good choice, but Tankard made the default figures old style. You need opentype advanced features to get at the lining figures, so most law firms wouldn’t be able to. Grrrrr!

As a lawyer and typefreak I started the quest for the real law font as well (maybe a task for highly appreciated Tobias F.?).

After tons of printouts etc I’m still not sure which font to use. Minion has a very professional look, but screams boring at the same time...and I would like to add a bit more modern touch as well.

I love the Scala Sans, but the serif in the family not too much.

H&FJ has really great fonts like Mercury or Gotham, but they just not seem right somehow for our profession.

Until now I have the following fonts in my shortlist to consider:

Scala Sans
DTL Documenta
Quadraat
Sabon
Verdana (looks surprisingly good sometimes)
Whitney
Corpid
Stone Sans/Serif
Syntax
Alber
Kievit

oops... I guess the shortlist is not that short after all... ;)

Thanks for all the suggestions.

Fedra is what I was looking for - modern but with human touch.

I was also thinking about Eva and Fresco from Our Type.

Fedra is definitely nice. I’m somewhat relieved to see Quadraat on OlafElexander’s list; several years ago I used it for a legal identity and I think it has been holding up quite nicely. But these days I think I would be much more inclined toward Stone. It’s just the perfect temperature.

When I read modern in your post I tought modern as Century or Torino.

Héctor

Very great topic. As a lawyer now I use Palatino font. I find it stylish, elegant, readable and much better than the boring TN Roman. Although something more unique and masculine font - Fedra or Quadraat - would be maybe even better.

positively needs lining figures, not old style figures, as the default

Why?

Because of text like this:

However, in Pushpanathan v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 1998 CanLII 778 (S.C.C.), [1998] 1 S.C.R. 982, at para. 25, this Court held that s. 83(1) does not require that the Court of Appeal address only the stated question and issues related to it

or this:

Some Canadian courts have imposed, in certain circumstances, a common law obligation on administrative decision-makers to provide reasons, while others have been more reluctant. In Orlowski v. British Columbia (Attorney-General) 1992 CanLII 878 (BC C.A.), (1992), 94 D.L.R. (4th) 541 (B.C.C.A.), at pp. 551-52

Most lawyers would find this in oldstyle untidy.

So, that’s why all the EULAs and stuff come in daft all-caps? Because most lawyers find ascenders and descenders ‘untidy’? Oh dear!

The conventions were developed when typewriters didn’t have small caps or bold. Underline was for italics.

Now. Now. Not all EULAs come in all caps. LOL

Most lawyers would find this in oldstyle untidy.

“Would” does not make a convincing prima facie case.

On further reflection, if you are correct in your assumption, I would hypothesize it’s a matter of the importance given to legal precedence, with lawyers refering frequently to Law Reports, set in Modern with lining figures.

I have some old 19th century British Law Reports like that. Is that the general style to this day, perhaps updated to Times?

On a purely empirical basis, lining figures may no doubt be tidy, but they are also lumpy in running text, and even confusing, with the propensity for mixing up 3 with 8. Why would lawyers prefer tidyness to ugly ambiguity?

Some courts in the United States require submissions in Times.

Generally lawyers nowadays cite from online sources. Most systems render cases and legislation from Westlaw and Quicklw in Arial.