CasePeer Pricing vs Filevine, Litify and Neos: What PI Case Management Costs Per User

Buying case management software for a plaintiff firm has a specific frustration built into it. You can compare features from marketing pages all day, but the moment you try to compare cost, half the market disappears behind a demo form. So the first job is not ranking products. It is working out which vendors will tell you a number without a sales cycle, and using those numbers as the yardstick for the ones that will not.

How much does CasePeer cost per user?

CasePeer publishes three tiers on its own pricing page: Basic at $79 per user per month, Pro at $119 and Advanced at $149. The heading over them reads "Simple, transparent pricing for personal injury case management software", and the page states your monthly subscription rate depends on the number of active firm users you have added to your account. CasePeer now sits under the 8am brand alongside MyCase, LawPay and DocketWise, which is why its legal AI feature appears as 8am IQ.

What you get for the steps between tiers matters more than the headline rate, because most firms land on Pro.

Two things are worth flagging. First, the client portal is in Basic, which is unusual: at several competitors a client portal is an extra. Second, eSignature is listed as an add-on at all three tiers, so a firm that sends retainers electronically has a line item beyond the seat rate no matter which tier it picks.

Which personal injury case management software publishes its pricing?

Two of the five do, in different ways. Checked on 8 September 2026 against each vendor's own pricing page rather than a directory listing, CasePeer publishes a complete three tier rate card, and Assembly Software publishes a starting price for Neos, writing that "Neos pricing is built around your firm's size. We offer three subscription tiers starting at $109 per user, paid annually", with the actual price depending on firm size and NeosAI added when you are ready.

The other three publish nothing. Filevine's pricing page carries no dollar figure at all and says every package is custom built for your team's needs. Litify's pricing page loads and contains no price either, with every route on it leading to a demo request. SmartAdvocate does not have a pricing page: the URL returns a 404.

Notice the pattern. Transparency in this category tracks who the vendor sells to, not how good the product is. The three that publish nothing are the ones marketed hardest to high volume plaintiff and mass tort firms, where deal sizes are large enough that a published rate would only get in the way of a negotiation. That is not a scandal, but it does mean a small firm comparing five vendors is comparing two prices and three sales processes.

What the seat math actually looks like

Per user pricing compounds quietly, and the tier you pick matters more as you grow. A six person firm on CasePeer Basic pays $474 a month, or $5,688 a year. The same firm on Pro pays $714 a month, $8,568 a year, and on Neos at the published $109 starting rate it would be $654 a month, $7,848 a year.

Now run it at twenty seats. Basic is $1,580 a month, Pro is $2,380 and Advanced is $2,980. The gap between the cheapest and the most expensive CasePeer tier at that headcount is $1,400 a month, $16,800 a year, which is real money for a mid sized plaintiff firm and is worth more scrutiny than the difference between two vendors' entry rates. Work out which tier you actually need before you compare vendors at all, because picking Pro when Basic covers you saves more than switching platforms usually does.

This is also where firms lose track. Case management is rarely the only per seat legal subscription in the building: research, e-signature, a payments processor, storage, and now an AI tool each arrive with their own per user rate and their own renewal date. Once there are five or six of them it becomes worth pulling the whole software spend into one view so you can see the real per attorney cost rather than approving five invoices separately.

Is CasePeer cheaper than Filevine?

Nobody can answer that honestly, because Filevine publishes no price. What you can do is use the CasePeer rate card as the benchmark you carry into the Filevine conversation. Ask Filevine to price each package and extension as its own line so the total can be compared to $79, $119 or $149 per seat rather than to a single blended monthly figure that cannot be checked against anything.

That matters at Filevine specifically because its platform is unusually modular. Matters is the base, then Intake, Depositions and Signatures are separate packages, and Periscope analytics, Timely deadline automation, the client portal and DataBridge all sit outside the base package as extensions. Our breakdown of Filevine pricing and every line item it quotes on lists the full map, including the detail that Filevine's advertised free trial covers only its LOIS AI tier and explicitly not case management.

What to do with a quote you cannot compare

Force it into the same shape as a rate card. Ask for the per seat rate and, more importantly, the seat definition: whether a part time intake clerk or a paralegal who only reads files needs a full paid seat moves the bill more than the rate does. Ask for every module as its own line with its list price next to it, even the ones being waived in year one. Ask who performs implementation and what it costs, since a vendor that routes onboarding through third party implementation partners is telling you that build work is billed separately.

Then ask for the renewal uplift cap in writing, as a percentage. A discounted first year with an uncapped renewal is the most common way a custom quote becomes expensive, and it is the easiest thing to fix at signature and the hardest to fix afterwards. Finally, ask what a full data export looks like and whether it costs anything, which is a fair question anywhere but a pointed one at a vendor that sells programmatic data access as a paid extension.

Does CasePeer require a long term contract?

CasePeer markets its pricing as monthly and states that your subscription rate depends on the number of active firm users added to your account. That is a different commercial posture from the quote based vendors, where term length is one of the main levers used to set a discount. It is still worth confirming the term on your own order form rather than relying on the marketing page, because what is published and what is signed are not always the same document.

Why do so many PI platforms hide their pricing?

Because the products are modular and sold to firms of wildly different sizes. A platform with separate intake, deposition, analytics and AI modules has no single number that describes a deployment, and quote based selling lets the vendor price by case volume and firm revenue rather than headcount alone. The practical effect for a buyer is that two firms of the same size can pay very different amounts, and the difference usually comes down to what each one knew to ask for.

What the platform will not do for you

One last thing worth weighing while you compare rate cards. Every product here is a system of record: it holds the file, tracks the treatment, stores the documents and reminds you about dates you entered. The work that actually consumes a PI paralegal's week sits on top of that. Somebody still builds the medical chronology, drafts the demand, and re-walks every dependent deadline when a trial date moves.

That is worth pricing as deliberately as the seats. If you are shortlisting on the general practice side as well, our legal case management software comparison covers the wider field on the same published rate basis, and our notes on what a plaintiff file needs from personal injury case management set out which of those workflows are worth automating first.