How EvenUp Levels the Playing Field for Personal Injury Firms

Law Firm Growth Podcast Episode 69: How a Consumer Litigation Financing Startup Was Born and Why Attorneys Should Take Notice with Saam and Raymond of EvenUp Law

Narrator: [00:00:00] 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.

Jan Roos: 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 San Mishad, and we also have Raymond Mishanitz and Sam and Ray are the co founders of even up law. That I like to talk about a lot of stuff that's new in the space.

Jan Roos: This isn't directly related to marketing, but it is absolutely important for the operations and one of everybody's favorite practice series of personal injury. So Sam and Ray, thank you so much for coming on the show.

Raymond Mieszaniec: Thanks for having us. Yeah. And it's great to see you after so many years.

Jan Roos: Yeah.

Jan Roos: Me and Sam's story actually starts. [00:01:00] Back in university, we were both students at the DeSotel faculty of management at McGill university. And I would probably say, I'm not sure if I remember the day, but I'm guessing it was cold overcast Montreal day. One or both of us was probably hung over and we were both on the executive of the McGill entrepreneurship division.

Jan Roos: All right. That sounds

Raymond Mieszaniec: about right.

Jan Roos: Yeah. Definitely hung

Raymond Mieszaniec: over. Yeah.

Jan Roos: And basically interestingly enough, I think, our 19 or 21 or whatever it ended up having versions of ourselves are probably 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.

Jan Roos: What kind of got you here?

Raymond Mieszaniec: Yeah, for sure. So as after this hotel I, in a moment of youthful indiscretion, I decided to go to law school. So I, I did do that. And then I graduated, ended up going, practicing in big one commercial litigation for some time in Toronto and Montreal. And really this [00:02:00] idea arose when I was in law school, the idea of consumer litigation funding, it was Largely undisturbed space whereby funders would be extending funding to consumers who are in need of financing while their lawsuits are going forward and the idea germinated in law school and we carried over the practice.

Raymond Mieszaniec: And I, one of our co founders who is on the line, Rami, I tried to convince him for about four to five years to do this consumer litigation financing idea. And what eventually convinced him was this paper written by Anthony Seabock showing the disproportionate returns that Existing consumer litigation funders generate so they charge between 100 plus percent interest on these funding arrangements that they put out and he was really taken by this and brought Ray into the fold.

Raymond Mieszaniec: And this story really resonated with Ray and Ray took things to the next level. And I'll maybe let Ray give his origin story here. I think it would be give pretty good context.

Saam Mashhad: Yeah. Hey [00:03:00] everybody, this is Ray for context. Yeah, I am not an attorney. I knew nothing about the law coming into this prior to this.

Saam Mashhad: I was in education and recruitment. This is my second rodeo, a second startup and essentially. Yeah, when Rami we were sitting in Dolores, if those familiar in San Francisco, Dolores Park, we were sitting in Dolores having a picnic and Rami just brought up, Hey, do you know what litigation finances?

Saam Mashhad: My friend Sam 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, and that rendered him permanently disabled for the rest of his life.

Saam Mashhad: 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 while my mom was working three jobs at a time just to put food on the table. We didn't have [00:04:00] any access to financing to get us by. So this was actually really interesting.

Saam Mashhad: 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 lowball settlement offer by the insurance carrier. Sam 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 lowball plaintiffs who are financially strapped, like my family was.

Saam Mashhad: So my dad ended up taking a 600 K settlement for two immigrant parents that 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 where 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 [00:05:00] dad's vehicle.

Saam Mashhad: He settled for around 1. 5 million. We know this because this guy was a local guy. He spoke with us as he was going through his case. And then my dad realized how basically how much we've lost from not basically going the extra mile with these, our attorney and the insurance carrier.

Saam Mashhad: So from that, we walked away with less and, we were just thinking, had we had a better attorney, had better representation, who actually better understood what that case was worth. 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.

Saam Mashhad: And that's what made me so fascinated about what we're doing today.

Raymond Mieszaniec: One thing I just want to 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 goes to pay off medical fees and liens and what have you.

Raymond Mieszaniec: So the, what actually went into his parents [00:06:00] pocket is somewhere between 200 and 300, 000. And if you want to think about the value of the working life of a person, that is only a fraction. And so obviously this is a situation that is widespread in America. And as Ray mentioned, there are really two governing factors.

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

Raymond Mieszaniec: They don't have access to experts. They don't have access to, 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 [00:07:00] way that the defense can.

Jan Roos: Yeah. And it's actually, we have a pretty.

Jan Roos: Interesting market too. And it's, this is the thing, it's whenever I'm talking with civilians, everyone's, Oh yeah, personal injury attorneys, you work with those guys, ambulance changers, blah, blah, blah. But the whole story that you just mentioned, Ray, just realizes the human side of these things in a way that I honestly don't think gets discussed on even legal podcasts that much.

Jan Roos: 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 befallen them. And when it plays off, it's fantastic. But, there's the real factors too, it's what the attorney had the ability to do it and, maybe it was his first rodeo or the pressure from the actual plaintiff.

Jan Roos: 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 it's obviously easy to look at your competition or look at your, your own website sometimes and see those, whatever 5 million recovered, 7 million recover, 11 million recovered.

Jan Roos: The reality is those giant settlements, [00:08:00] 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 what's the kind of, market penetration of people who have 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 this is, I've never actually discussed this with any clients I've ever had.

Raymond Mieszaniec: I think so just going back on, on what we do we build this technology that powers two different products. One is this consumer litigation financing product at hyper low rates. And the second is this idea of software that helps attorneys generate demand packages and to build up the value of their cases through damage assessments.

Raymond Mieszaniec: And the first prong, the consumer litigation funding monarchy has been around for about 20 years. There is a begrudging use of it. And that hesitance to use it is [00:09:00] derived primarily from the extremely high rates that are pervasive in the market. So I recommend everyone to look at the CBOC study, but basically the average rate is around 100%.

Raymond Mieszaniec: And so attorneys have a very difficult time recommending consumer litigation funding to their clients in good conscience for a couple of reasons. Hesitance 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, their client might not sign the dotted line.

Raymond Mieszaniec: If they're only getting like a net recovery of two to three K. The other issue is that oftentimes clients get this money and they forget they ever had it. And it becomes a difficult conversation to have at the end of the case. And finally, it's just the rates are really high relative to the underlying risks.

Raymond Mieszaniec: So there is just this overarching sense of unfairness. That being said. This is a [00:10:00] necessity for many clients. And so there is no official market study around this issue, but there is, we estimate that there is between 700 billion dollars 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 in most types of PI cases, excluding mass And if you look at the average distribution of Wealth in America, there's 40 percent of folks that live paycheck to paycheck.

Raymond Mieszaniec: So if there is any kind of income disruption events, then those people will presumably need some funding to carry them over to the finish line. And so that represents in rough numbers, about a 40%, a 40 billion market. 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 higher rates and the funders and so on [00:11:00] and so forth.

Raymond Mieszaniec: And I think our idea is 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

Saam Mashhad: to add on to Sam's point about the 100 percent average interest rate.

Saam Mashhad: So there's a large amount of these funders offering this funding at extremely predatory rates and where the lack of transparency comes from is the fact that people don't understand what interest rates actually mean. As you guys might know that six out of 10 Americans don't have more than 500 in savings.

Saam Mashhad: This is a huge financial literacy problem in the United States. And the fact that. They're being quoted, these interest rates and not actually understanding the impact to them at the end of their case is a huge problem that we're trying to solve. So with every client that we deal with, we have of course take the time to educate them on, what is the actual dollar amount that they would be owing at the end of their case.[00:12:00]

Saam Mashhad: But just to double click on what we're trying to do here, the idea motivating the funding side of our business is that can we build and use technology? To better understand the value of these cases and underwrite them more effectively and pass those savings to the end consumer. What we're trying to do is use this technology to offer clients this same type of funding at credit card rates, where for those listening, who don't really know much about consumer litigation finance, this funding is non recourse in nature.

Saam Mashhad: And what that means is You only pay this back if you win. So what we're trying to do is create an option for clients where if you were to choose between taking on credit card debt or non recourse funding at credit card rates, it would be a no brainer to use Even Up

Jan Roos: for your case. [00:13:00] Okay. That's awesome.

Jan Roos: And I think that also makes a lot of sense too, because it's, yeah, it's been something that I've always been like peripherally aware of, but a lot of these funding options too, it's just I bet, the people there's obviously better and worse people to take your money from the day.

Jan Roos: 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 operations, there's always considerations to take in mind. Okay. So switching over to the stuff that you guys are doing around maximizing case value, I think that's super interesting.

Jan Roos: And I've only had a little bit on purpose. I'm very low amount of discovery on this with you guys. So I really want to hear a little bit more about what you guys 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.

Raymond Mieszaniec: 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. Okay. So I would typically do a lot of very serious cases. So wrongful death cases and serious [00:14:00] dismemberment cases. And really on the defense side, the first thing you do when you get a case like that is to assess exposure.

Raymond Mieszaniec: 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 you will look at historic cases that the carrier had, or you will do a verdict analysis for the pain and suffering damages.

Raymond Mieszaniec: 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, it becomes pivotal in governing the defense's theory of the case and operating strategy. But plaintiffs don't have the entrenched [00:15:00] ability to do so for most cases.

Raymond Mieszaniec: 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, lien information, policy information that the inputs that they get from the client with respect to how the incident occurred and so on and so forth.

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

Raymond Mieszaniec: 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 [00:16:00] are the list of procedures. Give me your policy limit. And then the second case, you have the man package that clearly has built up the thesis of that piece of litigation to come, right?

Raymond Mieszaniec: 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 with supporting verdicts. And so that forces the claim adjuster, and it forces opposing counsel, if applicable, to treat that claim very differently.

Raymond Mieszaniec: And the promise of Even Up 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 defense has in a scalable and cost efficient way. And we can do this for a variety of techniques that we can discuss a little bit later, but we have [00:17:00] a tech stack that allows us to do this at scale.

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

Jan Roos: Army of, brilliant L3s to carry this whole workout fab workload for you, but yeah, let's get into that too, though. So as far as the actual tech stack how are we like getting all these references and stuff? 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?

Jan Roos: What would it look like to, if you had to just use human bodies to solve this problem?

Raymond Mieszaniec: 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.

Raymond Mieszaniec: Pre litigation, with most of the firms that we dealt with, it's typically a case manager who will take care [00:18:00] 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, they'll retrieve the medical records.

Raymond Mieszaniec: Once they have all the records, they will write the demand package, they will send it out, they will negotiate the outcome with the insurance carrier, and then they'll settle the lease, okay? And most of this is done by a case manager. Okay, with some oversight by the attorney, and you can think of it.

Raymond Mieszaniec: 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 process. Practice. They handle a lot dealing with clients that day in, day out is not an easy task, but it's all a manual process that's primarily driven by a case manager.

Raymond Mieszaniec: And if they have a lot of [00:19:00] clients, they're 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 on a per case basis. So they actually have to physically read through the medical records, read through the bills.

Raymond Mieszaniec: synthesize them, add them up, 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.

Jan Roos: Okay. Gotcha. So basically I think that the promise here too it's almost like a different situation for different firms, because that all 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 to how many people you want to have on payroll versus what the outcome is going to be increased.

Jan Roos: So it's talk about that too. So it's but it's interesting because in some levels for those larger firms, it's leverage. [00:20:00] But for the smaller firms or the solos, even it's 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?

Raymond Mieszaniec: Exactly. 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, that work in small offices will often be in these, overage situations, right? If they have a few depositions longer this week and they need to send out a few demands take the back burner.

Raymond Mieszaniec: 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 allow you to be an advocate by doing this paper pushing work. In a high quality fashion in a scalable fashion.

Raymond Mieszaniec: So we help a lot of solo practitioners who are either starting out or who have a growing practice to [00:21:00] 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 paralegal.

Raymond Mieszaniec: We're always going to be there when they need additional help. It doesn't represent necessarily a fixed cost to them. So it's like having a 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?

Raymond Mieszaniec: 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 what the attorney thought the case was worth because in the demand package in this case it was a mediation brief, but [00:22:00] we built in the economic loss computations.

Raymond Mieszaniec: We actually produced the model, put it in there. We produced a model for loss of household services. And that's significantly increased the potential value of the case. And it was presented in a manner that had a lot of credence and opposing counsel had to deal with it. And he ended up paying up half of what we wanted or what we asked for, but it was still two X, what we thought it was worth, what the attorney thought it was worth.

Raymond Mieszaniec: So that's really the dynamics between us and smaller firms.

Jan Roos: Yeah. And for the revenue minded listeners around it, I think that's a very tangible thing to think about too. It's Personal injury is one of those interesting spaces where, your customer lifetime value is dependent on so many outside factors, but, just talking about the dry numbers, shark tank perspective, you can double your customer value.

Jan Roos: 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?

Raymond Mieszaniec: Oh, yeah, for sure. The way we look at it, it's so easy to pay for [00:23:00] our services. With one case a year, if you do exceedingly well, you've paid for our services for a couple years to come, thing, 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 could just work with the case manager. We just need the documents to produce these outputs. Okay. So we don't even bother the attorney. We just get the documents from the case manager and turn around these demands on a going basis that the attorney can review and send out.

Raymond Mieszaniec: And so we really intersperse ourselves in the practice of smaller firms, and we basically turbocharge their Pre litigation practice and off and certain pieces of their litigation practice as well. And, ultimately the comments we've gotten are around, these demand packages that I can produce with your help.

Raymond Mieszaniec: 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 [00:24:00] reputation I'll be building with the criminal adjuster is that of a, an attorney that is attentive to detail that will build up case value at the pre litigation stage.

Raymond Mieszaniec: And it just makes them seem a lot better and more confident and more assertive in their personal injury practice.

Jan Roos: Yeah, it's interesting to, to watch some people's brand trajectories over the years too. It's winning those absolute dinger cases makes the insurance people start recognizing your name after a couple of years too.

Jan Roos: And if you're coming correct on all these things too, there's probably the effect that's really hard to measure about just the reputation associated with your name, but also to clients too, just thinking about it. It's 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 if they can get bigger and more frequent, like that's also huge for the reputation within the market too.

Jan Roos: And it's just one of those things, like not to even mention stuff like the referrals that could be possible as far as these improved outcomes. And then, not even the bad outcomes that people are avoiding. It's who among us [00:25:00] hasn't taken a client when they were a little bit overstretched, but those are the situation, those two star reviews on Google, man, that's not something you want to be getting into either.

Jan Roos: So I think it's absolutely critical for the small firms too. And I got to say too there's one thing that I've thought about a lot and it's just 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 and are evaluating personal injury firms.

Jan Roos: I said, basically there's two, two types. There's the personal injury firm. There's the. Aspirational personal injury for, and from what we were doing at the time, which was Google AdWords, it's very hard to get an aspirational personal injury firm to pay five or 10 grand a month plus fees for getting a campaign running, but absolutely there's people who need to make that transition.

Jan Roos: And it's such a hard thing to do because, 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 usually think about, and especially [00:26:00] the marketing minded among us. Think about how to get the case before how to solve the case.

Jan Roos: And I think you guys fill such an important gap for people who are at that stage, but to turn it around a little bit, let's talk about some of the bigger firms you guys are working with. And I know I'm not going to name any names, but I know you guys have partnered up with some of the bigger firms in this space.

Jan Roos: So what are these deployments look like in those larger firms?

Raymond Mieszaniec: Yeah, that's a great question. And we primarily work with the larger firms on questions of consumer litigation funding, which we 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.

Raymond Mieszaniec: 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 managers that is overworked. They need help with a case that is either really high value or really simple, but it's time consuming from a records perspective.

Raymond Mieszaniec: We step in and we [00:27:00] help them out. But I do want to just go back on a previous point you made around the art, the trajectory of a PI practitioner. We've noted as well. It's very similar to what you mentioned. 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 state minimum policy cases or 50, 000 policy limit cases.

Raymond Mieszaniec: The reason why they do that is because they don't have time anymore. 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 there's still somewhat simple and grow your practice in the higher value arena.

Raymond Mieszaniec: And so it's basically free money, right? If we can. Pump out herniated disks for you through MVAs with clear liability. We can turn it on in 10 or 20 a month with minimum oversight from you. You have to read the demand package, [00:28:00] make sure the documents are in order, and then send it out. That's less than an hour's time, right?

Raymond Mieszaniec: You can generate consistently three to six to 12, 000 per case with very little work, knowing that it's being taken care of by someone else.

Jan Roos: Yeah. To connect to that too, this is also a huge question that I used to ask whenever I'm, 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 you guys are out there catching fish, what case is too small?

Jan Roos: What do you throw back into the ocean? And the reality is, even those cases that are smaller than that I know some really big firms that are happy to take on a 15 1, 000 case, because some people have figured out a process to get that settled. And those are usually the ones that settle quickly.

Jan Roos: And it's a great way to, as we'd refer to in the marketing world, liquidate ad spend, right? Obviously, you'd love to be taking the seven and eight figure cases all day, those smaller cases, if it's not, Taking time away from getting the bigger cases are going to keep your ad spend.

Jan Roos: 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 [00:29:00] transitional space.

Raymond Mieszaniec: Yeah. I think what really attracted us to this space, we're honestly much more interested in smaller cases than the big ones. The big ones represent a lot more, just our unit economics don't work as well for the larger cases.

Raymond Mieszaniec: 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, a 50k to 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 seven epidural shots to try to inflate the value of the case.

Raymond Mieszaniec: 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.

Jan Roos: Yeah. And it's actually funny too. I don't know if it was just the way that we [00:30:00] introduced this, but you're actually bringing me back to some of the textbook stuff that they talked about in entrepreneurship class, Miguel, the disruption model, right?

Jan Roos: 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. It's cool that you guys are following along. Focusing on this, but in the same token, not to be too ambitious or extrapolate too much, 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.

Jan Roos: So I think it's really exciting, honestly. And as far as any kind of parting comments, but if not, like what's the best way to get in touch with you guys.

Raymond Mieszaniec: Sure. You can reach out to us at hello at even up law. com. So [email protected]. Or you can just visit our website at even up law.

Raymond Mieszaniec: com. That's our software slash servicing product for personal injury attorneys. Our consumer litigation funding product is on even up cash. com.

Jan Roos: Okay. Awesome guys. So once again, to the audience, I think I've, I love taking [00:31:00] innovative products onto the show. I think this is really a fantastic opportunity.

Jan Roos: And I'm not BS ing when I say that it is an opportunity when people are able to do this, because if this is something that your competition isn't focusing on, then you're This is something that you can be focusing on and that's one way to do it. But also look, I think for a lot of the smaller and transitional personal injury practices, this is not bandwidth that you can afford to lose.

Jan Roos: 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 a. m. Eastern on The Law Firm Growth podcast.

Narrator: Thank you for listening to The Law Firm Growth podcast for show notes, free resources and more head on over to casefuel.

Narrator: com slash podcast. Looking forward to catching up on the next episode.