How a Consumer Litigation Financing Startup Was Born and Why Attorneys Should Take Notice with Saam and Raymond of EvenUp Law

Resource Links:

• Plaintiff attorneys: Understand how much their lawsuits are worth — without the steep costs of experts with EvenUp Law
• Learn how to set – and meet – internal sales goals with Double Your Case Files Masterclass
• Estate planning attorney? Get online leads and sales coaching with Seminar 2.0

We’ve all seen the huge million dollar payouts advertised by personal injury attorneys. 

While some plaintiff cases result in handsome settlements, it’s not necessarily the norm.  For Americans who live paycheck-to-paycheck (about 40% of American families), affording a high-powered lawyer is out of reach.

To make matters worse, there aren’t many good options on the market for consumer litigation funding. And without a great attorney, a settlement may be meager at best or even non-existent. 

Raymond Mieszaniec’s family experienced this situation firsthand. During his childhood, his father was in a catastrophic vehicle accident, leaving his father permanently disabled and his family financially stuck and unable to afford a great attorney.

Saam Mashhad, on the other hand, saw these situations play out from an outside perspective. During his time as a lawyer, he was startled by both the human and financial cost of not being able to afford a great attorney.

So Saam came up with an idea to make personal injury attorney services more accessible to more people. And when Raymond heard about Saam’s mission, they joined forces to co-found EvenUp Law. 

In this week’s podcast, Saam Mashhad and Raymond Mieszaniec of EvenUp join us to discuss how their company is a game-changer for personal injury attorneys and plaintiffs, alike. 

On the attorney side, they explain how their software helps attorneys generate demand packages and build up the value of the cases at a lower cost.

They also discuss how their platform allows consumers to get financing at a hyper-low rate, so more people can afford the legal help they need.

There’s much more to learn in this episode about scaling your firm, so tune in now!

About Our Guests:

Saam Maashad and Raymond Mieszaniec are the co-founders of EvenUp Law, which helps personal injury victims get justice, irrespective of their income, access to capital, or legal representation. Connect with Saam Mashhad on LinkedIn and Raymond Mieszaniec on LinkedIn.

Episode Transcript

Welcome to the Law Firm Growth Podcast, where we share the latest tips, tactics, and strategies for scaling your practice from the top experts in the world of growing law firms. Are you ready to take your practice to the next level? Let’s get started.

Hey everybody. Welcome back to the Law Firm Growth Podcast. I have a very exciting episode right now with a ghost from my past, an old friend in Saam Maashad. And we also have Raymond Mieszaniec, and Saam and Ray are the co-founders of EvenUp Law.  

So, you know, I like to talk about a lot of stuff that’s new in this space. This isn’t directly related to marketing, but it is absolutely important for the operations and one of everybody’s favorite practice areas: personal injury. So Saam and Ray, thank you so much for coming on the show.

Thanks for having us. Yeah. It was great to see you after so many years. 

Yeah. So, Saam and I’s story actually starts back in university. We were both students at the Desautels Faculty of Management at McGill University in, I would probably say, I’m not sure if I remember the day, but I’m guessing it was a cold overcast Montreal day. One, or both of us were probably hung over. And we were both on the Executive of the McGill entrepreneurship division. 

That sounds about right. Yeah, definitely hung over. 

Yeah. Yeah. And interestingly enough, I think, our 19 or 21 or whatever version of ourselves would probably be pretty proud of where we wound up, but I would love to hear the story for the listeners of how you wound up running a startup in the legal technology space from the start. And what kind of got you here? 

Yeah, sure. So as you know, after Desautels, in a moment of youthful indiscretion, I decided to go with the law school. I did do that. And I graduated, ended up going and practicing in big law and commercial litigation for some time in Toronto and Montreal. And really this idea arose when I was in law school, the idea of consumer litigation funding, it was a largely undisturbed space, where funders would be extending funding to consumers who are in need of financing while their lawsuits are going forward. 

And the idea sort of germinated in law school. And we started to carry it over the practice. And one of our co-founders who isn’t on the line, Rami, I tried to convince for about four to five years to do this consumer litigation financing idea.

Right. And it would eventually convince them was this paper written by Anthony Seabach showing the disproportionate returns that existing consumer litigation funders generate. So they charge between a hundred plus percent interest on these funding arrangements that they put out. And he was really taken by this and brought Ray into the fold.

And this story really resonated with Ray and sort of took things to the next level. And I’ll maybe let Ray give his origin story here. I think you would be given pretty good context. 

Yeah. So, Hey everybody, this is Ray. For context, I am not an attorney. I knew nothing about the law coming into this. Prior to this, I was in education and recruitment. This is my second rodeo, a second startup. And essentially, we were sitting in Dolores, for those familiar with San Francisco – Dolores park, we were sitting in Dolores having a picnic and Rami just brought up: “Hey, do you know what litigation finance is? My friend Saam is thinking of getting some friends to pull some money together where we can invest in lawsuits together and also help people at the same time.” And when I heard that story, I was like, okay, so how does litigation finance work? 

And this was really interesting to me because back in 2004, my dad was actually involved in a catastrophic motor vehicle accident that rendered him permanently disabled for the rest of his life. So for the next, three to four years, we were actually in court fighting against the big insurance carrier, trying to get a fair settlement. All my mom was working three jobs at a time just to put food on the table. We didn’t have any access to financing to get us by. So this was actually really interesting.

This is something that could have felt like it really could have helped us during those times. In addition to that, my dad ended up seeing that my mom was working so hard. He took a low ball settlement offer by the insurance carrier. Saam is probably more familiar with this as he was on the dark side, if you will, but insurance carriers don’t necessarily present the best offers early on in the case.

And typically low ball plaintiffs who are financially strapped. Like my family was. So my dad ended up taking a $600k settlement anad for two immigrant parents, this was more money that they’ve ever earned in their entire life. They’ve never seen anything more than this. Little did they know that they could be settling more. Six months later, a secondary victim in the case who was not directly impacted by the driver that hit my father, but was hit by a piece of my dad’s vehicle.

He settled for around $1.5 million. We know this because this guy was a local guy and he spoke with us as he was going through his case. And then my dad realized basically how much we’ve lost from not going the extra mile with our attorney and the insurance carrier. So from that, we walked away with less and we were just thinking if we had a better attorney, had better representation who better understood what that case was worth. I had, we had better representation. Maybe my parents would have known that they could have stuck it out and earned a larger settlement through this.

And that’s kind of what made me so fascinated about what we’re doing today. One thing to sort of quickly add is that $600K might sound like a lot of money, but. Keep in mind that usually a third of that minimum goes to the attorney and then there’s a huge chunk of that that goes to pay off medical fees and liens.

And what have you. So, what actually went into his parents, his pocket is somewhere between $200-300k. If you want to think about the value of the working life of a person that is only a fraction of that. And so obviously this is a situation that is widespread in America. And as Ray mentioned, there are really two governing factors.

First is lack of access to capital for the plaintiffs. So there is no financial runway for them to get from incident to payouts. And number two is, I don’t want to be harsh, I don’t think it’s a bad representation, it’s just that the plaintiff bar does not have the same tool kits as defense does. They don’t have as many people working for them.

They don’t have access to experts. They don’t have the benefit of having as much time. They’re often constrained by their own cash flows. So it’s just a much more difficult practice to work up all of your cases. The same way the defense can. Yeah. And it’s actually, we have a pretty interesting market too. And this is the thing, whenever I’m talking with civilians, everyone is, “Oh yeah. Personal injury attorneys. You work with those guys, you know, ambulance chasers, blah, blah, blah.” But the whole story that you just mentioned, Ray, just kind of realizes the human side of these things in a way that I honestly don’t think gets discussed on even legal podcasts that much.

I really think the work of a good personal injury attorney is Robin Hood stuff, right. You’re fighting on behalf of the little guy for some wrong that’s all on them. And when it plays off, it’s fantastic. But you know, there’s the real factors too, you know, it’s like, you know what? The attorney had the ability to do it and you know, maybe it was his first rodeo or the pressure from the actual plaintiff.

To settle can sometimes be more than people can overcome. So from the perspective of the people who might be launching PI practices, it’s really interesting too. Because it’s obviously easy to look at your competition or look at your own websites sometimes and see those 5 million recovered, 7 million recover, 11 million are recovered, but the reality is those giant settlements aren’t the kind of things that get settled with a demand letter in two months. And sometimes the ones that are particularly grievous, you don’t really think about the human factor of this. 

So just to educate myself on this, from what you guys see, like what’s the market penetration of people who has access to this in terms of the overall personal injury world, because we’ve worked with quite a few personal injury firms as far as the marketing side, but I’ve never actually discussed this with any clients I’ve ever had.

Yes, so, just going back on what we do, right. We build this technology that powers two different products. One is this consumer litigation financing product, with hyper low rates. And then the second is this idea of software that helps attorneys generate demand packages and to build up the value of their cases to damage assessments.

The first prompt consumer litigation funding has been around for about 20 years. There is a begrudging use of it. And that hesitance to use it is derived primarily from the extremely high rates that are pervasive in the market. So I recommend everyone to look at the Seabach study, but basically the average rate is around 100%.

And so the attorneys have a very difficult time recommending consumer litigation funding to the clients in good conscience for a couple of reasons. Number one is it leads to settlement distortions. So if you get a thousand dollars of funding and then it turns into $5,000 by the end of it, and you’re settling for $15,000, the client might not sign the bottom line.

If they’re only getting like a net recovery of $2-3k, the other issue is that oftentimes clients get this money and they forget they ever had it. And so it becomes a difficult conversation to have at the end of the case. And finally, the rates are really high relative to the underlying risks.

So there is just this overarching sense of unfairness. That being said, this is a necessity for many, many clients. And so there is no official market study around this issue, but we estimate that there is between $700 billion of funding that’s circulating every year. But if you look at the general PI practice, there’s about a hundred billion dollars worth of settlements and most types of PI cases, excluding mass torts.

And if you look at the average distribution of wealth in America, there’s 40% of folks that live paycheck to paycheck. So if there are any kind of income disruption events, then those people will presumably need some funding to carry them over the finish line. And so that represents in rough numbers about 40% of a $40 billion market.

Right. And we’re not there yet. And the reason why we’re not there yet is because this industry is still in its nascent stages. Because of the taboo around the high rates and the funders and so on and so forth. And I think our ideas that this can be changed, consumer litigation funding can be made more palatable. If the rates are more transparent, the rates are lower and that there is just better operating relationship between law firms and funders. 

Okay. That’s awesome. And I think that also makes a lot of sense too, because it’s been something that I’ve always been peripherally aware of, but a lot of these funding options too, I bet there’s obviously better and worse people to take your money from at the end of the day.

And if, if it’s money with certain conditions, I could probably get a loan for 10 grand right now. I might not have my kneecaps in a couple of weeks, but there’s always the option. There’s always considerations to take in mind. Okay. So switching over to like the stuff that you guys are doing around maximizing case value. I think that’s super interesting and a little bit on purpose, I did a very low amount of discovery on this with you guys. So I really want to hear a little bit more about what you are doing to help people. Not only get to the point where you have the payout, but ultimately make that payout be something that’s bigger than it would be otherwise.

Yeah. So to give you more context, I’ll let me just walk you through my background and how I would approach a PI defense. So I would typically do a lot of very serious cases, wrongful death cases and serious dismemberment cases, and on the defense side, the first thing you do when you get a case like that is to assess exposure.

You want to report to the carrier what is the value of this case and what is the exposure of the firm and they need to do this exercise for accounting purposes. They want to know how much cash they need to set aside for their outstanding claims, and to do so you will look at historic cases that the carrier had, or you will do a verdict analysis for the pain and suffering damages.

And you will also do an economic analysis for things like lost wages. Future medical costs and past medical costs. And you’ll look at things like loss of services and so on and so forth. Now, this analysis becomes pivotal in governing the defenses theory of the case and operating strategy, but plaintiffs don’t have the entrenched ability to do so for most cases.

So what we do when we step into law firms is help them build up the value of their cases earlier. And what that means practically is that they give us the information that they have, their medical records, their medical bills, learning, that information policy information, that the inputs that they get from the client with respect to how the incident occurred and so on.

And we build up those facts into a demand package that becomes really, really well presented, well-organized and builds up elements of loss that would otherwise not be claimed like lost wages. Lastly, medicals lost household services. And we also reference verdicts for things like pain and suffering or loss of consortium as well.

And the net difference is huge, right? There’s in one scenario, you’re getting a demand package with a two page demand package saying this is what happened. Liability is clear. Here are the analysis procedures, give me your, your policy limit. And then in the second case you have the demand package that clearly has built up the thesis of that piece of litigation.

Right? You have a clear exposition of facts, a clear exposition of liability. You have a detailed medical narrative, you have a detailed theory of what your damages should be by element of loss, with supporting documentation, with supporting computation and all the supporting verdicts. And so that forces the claim adjuster and forces opposing counsel, if applicable, to treat that claim very, very differently.

And the promise of even is to be able to deliver this product at scale. And at an affordable rate. So we’re basically trying to give the plaintiff counsel the same capacity as the fence has in a scalable and cost efficient way. And we can do this with a variety of, uh, techniques that we can discuss a little bit later, but we have a tech stack that allows us to do this at scale.

Yeah, well now actually the brand name makes a lot more sense because basically, yeah, it’s like, you know, the people that you’re up against are hiring, you know, the top talent from the top universities and colleges in the country. And if you’re the person who just, you know, this might be the first personal injury case here, even if you’re a smaller, you know, even a couple person firm, it’s like, you don’t have that.

Army of, you know, brilliant  to carry this whole workout that workload for you. But yeah, let’s get into that too, though. So as far as the actual tech stack, how are we kind of like getting all these references and stuff, right. Cause I think, let me actually ask you this. What does the process look like without technology to be able to deliver something like this?

Like what would it look like if you had to just use human bodies to solve this problem? Sure. I’ll just give you a sense of how most firms solve this issue. So there’s, I just want to be mindful of the stages of litigation there’s the pre-litigation practice. And then there’s the practice while in litigation pre-litigation with most of the firms that we’ve dealt with, it’s typically a case manager.

Who will take care of it? What that means practically is that they’ll take care of intake. They will follow up with the client to make sure that they’re going to their treatments, the old retrieve, the medical records. Once they have all the records, they will write the man package. He’ll send that out.

They will negotiate the outcome with the insurance carrier and then they’ll settle the leads. Okay. Most of this is done by a case manager. Okay. With some oversight by the attorney, you can think of it. There’s an inverse correlation between how involved the attorney is. Versus how many cases the attorney has.

Right? So the more cases the attorney has, the more of this process is handled by a case manager and really case managers are the unsung heroes in the pre-lit practice. They handle a lot of dealing with clients. They end the ad. It’s not an easy task, but. It’s all a manual process. That’s primarily driven by a case manager.

And if they have a lot of clients that are really being pushed to produce as many demand packages as they can to meet the demand. And sometimes that creates a lot of strain on what they can do in appropriate spaces. So they actually have to physically read through the medical records, read through the bills, synthesize them, add them up, and put some pros around it.

Put them into the band package, add some additional flourish and then send it off. So it’s a tedious manual process that is often done by non-attorneys. Okay. Gotcha. So basically I think that the promise here too, it’s, it’s almost like a different situation for different firms because you know, that all kind of sounds like overhead to me.

If I’m thinking about the big firm, who’s got 50 of these guys, and if you want to get a better job, like you have to do some sort of a cost benefit analysis of how many people you want to have on payroll versus what the outcome is going to be. So it’s kind of like talking about that too. So it’s interesting because in some of those, for those larger firms, it’s kind of leverage.

But for the smaller firms or the solos, even it’s like, this might be a capability. Like I’m sure there’s a bunch of cases working on right now or that the attorney who’s doing everything else is also the case manager. Right? Exactly. That’s, that’s absolutely right. So if there is no case manager, the attorney has to run this end to end.

And so solo practitioners or attorneys that have work in small offices will often be in these overage situations. Right. If they have a few depositions along the, this week, And they need to send out a few demands, demands, take the back burner. It’s very difficult to service them in time. It’s very easy not to have enough time.

And so where we step in is we give them that overage capacity. So if you are an advocate and you want to be an advocate, we’ll allow you to be an advocate by doing this paper, pushing work. In a high quality fashion in a scalable fashion. So we help a lot of solo practitioners who are either starting out or who have a growing practice to service the demands as they come.

And what we’ve noticed is that as soon as someone uses us a little bit, they tend never to leave because basically we’re much cheaper than a case manager or a paralegal. We’re always going to be there when they need additional help. It doesn’t necessarily represent a fixed cost to them. So it’s like having a really, really good junior associate slash expert on call at all times.

And so it makes a lot of sense to keep us around. And moreover, it’s even good to have us around. To almost get a second opinion on how much you think your case is worth. Right? Sometimes, sometimes we get cases and the attorney tells us, he thinks it’s worth 300, 400, $500,000. And we come back with a demand package for $1.8 million.

And we had one case recently where they settled for two times while the attorney thought the case was worth it because in the demand package, well, in this case was a mediation brief, but. We built in the economic laws computations. We actually produced the model, put it in there. We produced the model for loss of household services, and that significantly increased the potential value of the case.

And it was presented in a matter that had a lot of credence and opposing counsel had to deal with it. And he ended up. Picking up half of what we wanted or what we asked for, but it was still two X, what we thought it was worth it, the attorney thought it was worth. So that’s really the dynamics between us and smaller firms.

Yeah. And, and for the, uh, revenue minded listeners around it, I think that’s a very tangible thing to think about too. It’s like, you know, personal injury is one of those interesting space spaces where, you know, your customer lifetime value is dependent on so many outside factors, but, you know, just talking about the dry numbers, you know, shark tank perspective, if you can double your customer value, what does that do for the possibilities for your marketing and scaling the firm?

I’m sure that person’s having a much different year than they thought of for the size of that settlement. Right? Oh, yeah, for sure. The way Luke had it, it’s so easy to pay for our services with one case a year. If you do exceedingly well, you’ve paid for our services for a couple of years to get a certificate, you know, and one thing I also wanted to mention was around how we work with law firms, right?

So you can have one lawyer with one case manager and we can just work with the case manager. We just need the documents to produce these outputs. So we don’t even bother with the attorney. We just get the documents from the case manager and turn them around, these demands on a going basis that the attorney can review and send out.

And so we really interspersed ourselves in the practice of smaller firms and we basically turbocharge their pre-litigation practice enough and certain pieces of their litigation practice as well. And, you know, ultimately the comments we’ve gotten are around, you know, these demand packages that, that I can produce with your help.

I’m proud to present them to my client to say, this is the representation that I’m making on your behalf. I’m proud to present them to the claim adjuster, because I know that the reputation I’ll be building with equivalent gestures is that of an attorney that is attentive to detail that will build up case value as the pre-litigation stage.

And it just makes them seem a lot. Better and more confident and more assertive in their personal injury practice. Yeah, it’s kind of interesting too, to kind of watch some people’s brand trajectories over the years, too. It’s like, you know, winning those absolute dinger cases makes the insurance people start recognizing your name after a couple of years, too.

And if you’re coming correct on all these things too, there’s probably a. That effect, that’s really hard to measure about just the reputation associated with your name, but also to clients too, just thinking about it’s like, it’s such a common practice in the personal injury space to just have those big numbers listed on the website, but it’s just like, if they can get bigger and more frequent, like that’s also huge for the reputation within the market too.

And it’s like just one of those things, like not even mentioning stuff like the referrals that could be possible as far as these improved outcomes. And then, you know, not even the bad outcomes that people are avoiding, right. It’s like, You know, who among us, hasn’t taken a client when they were a little bit overstretched, but those are the situations, those two star reviews on Google, man.

That’s not something you want to be getting into either. So I think it’s absolutely critical for the small firms too. And like I got to say too, like, there’s one thing that I’ve thought about a lot and it’s just like, um, some people who have. And I actually, I mentioned this on a podcast that I was on the other day with care of a ball who I absolutely have to introduce you to, but basically I was talking about how we used to evaluate people from what I had our sales team do, evaluating personal injury firms.

I said, you know, basically there’s kind of two, two types. There’s the personal injury firm. Then there’s the aspirational personal injury firm. And from what we were doing at the time, which was Google ad words, it’s very hard to get an aspirational personal injury firm to pay five or 10 grand a month plus fees for getting.

Campaign running, but absolutely there’s people who need to make that transition. And it’s such a hard thing to do because, you know, you have to assume that person has other practice areas. So I think just as far as anyone who happens to be in this position right now, you know, you usually think about, and it’s especially the marketing minded among us.

Think about how to get the case before, how to solve the case. And I think you guys fill such an important gap for people who are at that stage, but to kind of turn it around a little bit, let’s talk about some of the bigger firms you guys are working with. And I know not going to name any names, but I know you guys have partnered up with some of the bigger firms in this space.

So what do these deployments look like in those larger firms? Yeah, that’s a great question. And we, we primarily work with the larger firms on questions of consumer litigation funding. We should have started working more with them on the overage cases, right? Even if you have a giant firm with tens to hundreds of paralegals and case managers, oftentimes your people will be overworked.

And you want them a hundred percent for certain cases at the pre-lit stage. Right. And that’s where we step in. So there’s a particular attorney case manager that is overworked. They need help with a case that is either really, really high value or really, really simple. But it’s time-consuming from a records perspective.

We step in and we help them out. But I didn’t want to just go back on a previous point you made around the arc, the trajectory of, of a, of a PI practitioner, what we’ve noted as well. It’s very similar to what you mentioned. You know, you have a, you have a personal injury attorney that starts off starts taking smaller cases, and then they just graduate into these larger cases to the exclusion of.

The smaller like statement and policy cases are 50,000 policy limit cases. The reason why they do that is because they don’t have time. And I mean, the value of their time is optimized by them. Focusing on these larger cases. And what we’ve noticed is if we step in and we help you really streamline that pre-lit practice, you can keep those smaller cases because they’re still somewhat simple.

And grow your practice in the higher value arena. And so it’s basically free money, right? If we can. Pump out herniated disks for you through MBAs, with clear liability, we can turn around in 10 or 20 a month with minimal oversight from you. I mean, you’re going to read the demand package to make sure that the documents are in order and then send that out.

That’s what’s less than an hour’s time, right? You can generate consistently three to six to $12,000 per case with very, very little work knowing that it’s being taken care of by someone else. Yeah. I mean to connect to that too. This is also a huge question that I used to ask whenever. Um, I mean, it’s been a long time since we’ve been focused on personal injury, but one of the questions I’d always ask on calls is like, you know, you guys are out there catching fish.

What case is too small, or you throw it back into the ocean. And the reality is, you know, even those cases that are smaller than that, like, you know, I, I know some really big firms that are happy to take on a 15. Thousand dollar case because some people have figured out a process to get that settled. And those are usually the ones that settle quickly.

And it’s a great way to, as we refer to in the marketing world, liquidate ad spend, right. Obviously, you know, you’d love to be taking the seven and eight figure cases all day, but you know, those smaller cases, if it’s not taking time away from getting the bigger cases are going to keep your ad spend, it’s going to keep the lights on from a lot of the marketing stuff.

So it really does empower a lot of options for people that are in that transitional space. Yeah. I mean, I think what really attracted us to this space. I mean, we’re honestly much more interested in smaller cases than the big ones. The big ones represent a lot more. I mean, just our unit economics don’t work as well for the larger cases, but.

There has been no innovative solution that has been built to service these smaller cases. And most people, no matter how serious their injury, will be subject to either a state minimum policy or, you know, a 50K to a 100K policy. So how do you deal with those cases in the most efficient manner?

Providing the most service to the client and maximizing their outcome without forcing them to get like seven epidural shots to try to inflate the value of the case. So that’s really where we step in and try to maximize value through advocacy through good written work, through reliance, on data, both verdicts and computations.

And I think it’s made a very big difference. Yeah. And it’s actually kind of funny too. I don’t know if it was just the way that we insured this, but you’re actually bringing me back to some of the textbook stuff that they talked about, an entrepreneurship class, Miguel, the disruption model, right?

It’s not about a lot of cases about innovating at the top of the market. It’s the part of the market that other people are not paying attention to. So, it’s cool that you guys are focusing on this, but in the same token, not to be too ambitious or extrapolate too much, right, but people who want to pursue this can jump on this road and become the firm that’s helping out with those in their market.

So I think it is really exciting, honestly. What’s the best way to get in touch with you guys? 

Sure. You can reach out to us at hello@evenuplaw.com or you can just visit our website at evenuplaw.com. That’s our software/servicing product for personal injury attorneys. Our consumer litigation funding product is on evenupcash.com. 

Okay, awesome guys. So once again to the audience, you know I love talking about innovative products on the show. I think this is really a fantastic opportunity and I’m not BSing.

I say that it is an opportunity because if this is something that your competition isn’t focusing on, this is something you can be focusing on. But also, I think for a lot of the smaller and transitional personal injury practices, this is bandwidth they can’t afford to lose.

Again, thanks for coming on the show guys. Thanks for creating this platform in the first place and for everyone else, I’ll see you guys next Tuesday at 8:00 AM Eastern on the Law Firm Growth Podcast. Thank you for listening. For show notes, free resources and more head on over to casefuel.com/podcast.

Looking forward to catching up on the next episode.