Legal bill review that reads every line of every defense invoice, not a sample
Every time entry reviewed, not sampled, before a defense invoice is paid.
See one case, screen by screen ↓Software that checks law-firm invoices against the insurer’s outside counsel billing guidelines, rate agreements and case budgets before they are paid. Legal Bill Review has seven agents read every line of every defense invoice, tag each break with its guideline section and budget phase, and write the reason the firm will see; the bill reviewer decides every reduction.
How to choose AI solutions for insurance →
Updated
Every month the panel firms send their LEDES files: 50 to 300 time entries an invoice, coded in UTBMS, across dozens of litigated suits. Nobody can read every line, so the bill reviewer samples. The rules that leak are mechanical — block billing, vague entries, clerical work, a second attendee at an internal conference, research nobody approved, a partner billed above the agreed rate, an associate who is not on the staffing approval, duplicates and non-reimbursable expenses — and a sample walks straight past them.
When a reduction does go back, it goes back as a number with no reason attached. The firm appeals, and the appeal waits weeks for someone to pull the guideline and the file. Meanwhile the approved case budget sits in a folder: a case burning through discovery is found out when the firm asks for more money, or at trial.
Estimated split for one invoice, by hand and with the solution. The appeal figures are this quarter’s median answer times in the working solution: 19 days by hand, 2 days with the appeal reader.
Seven specialist agents read every line, cite the rule each one breaks and watch the case budget; the bill reviewer decides.
Hargrove Lindqvist LLP bills September on Torres v. Brayford Logistics — a deposition month on a rear-end trucking suit with a C5–C6 fusion and a $2.4M demand. Here is what happens next, screen by screen, in the working solution.
Dana opens the solution on invoice HL-26-0917: LEDES 1998B, 143 lines, 198 hours, $44,995.62 billed, pay by Sat 7 Nov. The rule bar says 52 of 143 lines break a rule, with one chip per guideline section and its dollars. Across the top, the other invoices waiting — 9 need review out of 20 this week.
“52 of 143 lines break a rule.”
The invoice reader tied every line’s units × rate and the invoice total to $44,995.62. The rate and staffing checker found Lena Morrow missing from the 12 Feb approval and Graham Lindqvist billed at $310 against the agreed $285. The guideline checker tested every line against nine sections; the duplicate and pattern finder compared it with invoices 1–7 on the case and found one entry billed twice, on 17 and 18 Sep.
The last step is always hers: “Your decision” — “Apply, change or waive each reduction, then approve for payment.”
Five deposition-month entries lump four or five tasks under one time charge — Nora Pell 16.6 hours, Tobias Reyes 14.4, Ana Whitlock 4.6. Dana applies §5.2 and they fold into one row: 35.6 hours, $6,800.00 billed, $3,400.00 paid at 50%. The firm can resubmit with time per task.
“5 block-billed entries · −$3,400.00 · paid at 50% under §5.2.”
Line 24: Lena Morrow billed 2.6 hours on 8 Sep to review 412 pages of the plaintiff’s Saint Luke’s Hospital records. In all she billed 7.6 hours, $1,482.00, on three lines. The line opens with its UTBMS codes, its arithmetic, the quoted guideline section and the explanation the firm will see, which Dana can edit, save or waive.
“Lena Morrow is not named in the staffing approval of 12 Feb 2026. Under §3.3 her time is not payable unless Marcus Bell approves her in writing.”
With September as recommended, fees reach $119,740 of the $175,000 approved on 12 Feb — 68%. Discovery is at 98% of its $72,000 with depositions still to come. At $20,978 a month, the pace of the last three invoices, the case passes its budget on 19 Dec 2026 and reaches about $292,809 by trial on 8 Jun 2027.
It never changes an approved budget, and it always states its pace: last 3 invoices, last 6, or the firm’s phase plan.
The note to Colleen Hart, copied to Graham Lindqvist and Marcus Bell, gives the amount the carrier will pay — $34,814.62 — and one row per reason with its guideline section. It says the four vague entries will be paid once rewritten, that block-billed entries resubmitted with time per task will be reviewed again, and that the firm may answer any line in the portal within 30 days.
It drafts; it never sends without the reviewer, and never characterises the firm.
Dana approves $34,814.62 of $44,995.62 billed: $8,723.00 reduced and $1,458.00 held until the firm describes four entries — within her $25,000 reduction limit. The payment goes to the claims payment run on Fri 16 Oct with a LEDES adjustment file of 52 lines with reasons, and Marcus Bell gets the budget alert.
Calder & Voss appeals three lines on Hale v. Parkline Apartments. The appeal reader recommends accepting the mediation entry, now split by task, with travel at 50% under §7.3; upholding the clerical entry, because no chronology was sent; and accepting the research, because Simone Achebe’s email of 2 Sep approved it “up to 6 hours”. The reviewer accepts or upholds each line.
This quarter: 41 appeals closed, median answer time 2 days — “was 19 days by hand”.
The weekly budget watch sorts the litigated suits by the date each passes its approved budget. Six of nine will pass before trial at today’s pace — $387,329 over in all — with Estate of Pruitt v. Marlow Transit Co. first, on 19 Nov 2026. Marcus approves timekeepers, research and budget revisions before the work is done.
From every reviewed line, a scorecard per firm: suits, fees billed this year, share reduced, flags per 100 lines, the rule it breaks most and how its appeals end. Hargrove Lindqvist runs at 11.8% reduced and 9.4 flags per 100 lines, a third of it block billing.
“Block billing has risen each month since May, almost all of it on deposition days.”
The same invoice, seen by the four people who carry it — what their month looked like, and what it looks like now.
Seven specialist agents read every line, cite the rule each one breaks and watch the case budget; the bill reviewer decides.
Reads LEDES 1998B and XML files, or the PDF invoice, into lines with timekeeper, UTBMS task and activity codes, hours, rate and amount; recomputes each line and the total and maps each task code to its budget phase.
Checks every timekeeper against the case’s staffing approval and every rate against the firm’s rate agreement for the year.
Tests every line against the nine sections of the billing guidelines — block billing, vague entries, clerical work, internal conferences, research limits and expenses — and quotes the words or numbers that break each one.
Finds work billed twice, in one invoice or across invoices, and days where a timekeeper bills more than is believable.
Applies each invoice to the case budget by phase, projects the date the case passes it and the fees at trial, and drafts the request for a revised budget.
Writes the explanation for each reduction in a line the firm can answer, the LEDES adjustment file and the note to the billing contact.
Reads each firm’s answer to a reduction, checks it against the guideline and the approvals on file, and recommends accept or uphold.
Decides every reduction. The agents propose; a named person decides.
The reviewer can ask in plain words — or have it draft the note to the firm. Every answer points to the line, the guideline section or the approval it rests on.
Why is $3,400 cut for block billing on the Hargrove invoice?
Five entries put four or five tasks under one time charge — for example Nora Pell’s 8.7 hours on 14 Sep cover deposition preparation, ELD logs, dash-camera stills, an outline and a client call. Our guidelines pay block-billed time at 50%: $6,800.00 billed across 35.6 hours, so −$3,400.00. If Hargrove resubmits the five entries with time per task, we review them again.
When does Torres v. Brayford run out of budget?
Fees reach $119,740 of the $175,000 approved on 12 Feb if September is paid as recommended. At $20,978 a month — the pace of the last three invoices — the case passes the budget on 19 Dec 2026 and reaches about $292,809 by trial on 8 Jun 2027. Discovery is the phase running hot: 98% of its $72,000 is used, with five depositions still to come.
Was Lena Morrow approved to bill Torres?
No. Marcus Bell’s staffing approval of 12 Feb names four timekeepers — Graham Lindqvist, Nora Pell, Tobias Reyes and Ana Whitlock. Lena Morrow billed 7.6 hours in September, $1,482.00, on three lines. Under §3.3 that time is not payable without his written approval. If the work was needed, Marcus can approve her and the reduction can be waived line by line.
Draft the reduction note to Hargrove Lindqvist
Drafted for Colleen Hart, copied to Graham Lindqvist and Marcus Bell. It gives the amount we will pay, $34,814.62, a line per reason with its guideline section, what the firm can resubmit, and a note that the case will pass its $175,000 budget around 19 Dec 2026. It goes with the adjustment file when you approve.
13 screens from the working solution, on its sample data. Pick one to see it large.
Everything that differs between carriers, firms and cases is a setting — versioned and on the audit trail.
| Setting | Default | Choose from |
|---|---|---|
| Approve clean invoices by rule | Under $5,000, no line flagged | $5,000 · $10,000 · Never |
| Reviewer’s reduction limit | $25,000 | $10,000 · $25,000 · $50,000 |
| Appeals decided by claims legal counsel above | $5,000 | $2,500 · $5,000 · $10,000 |
| Pay within | 30 days of a complete invoice | 30 · 45 · 60 days |
| Pace used for budget projections | Last 3 invoices | Last 3 invoices · Last 6 invoices · Firm’s phase plan |
| Alert the litigation specialist | Before trial | Before trial · Within 90 days · Within 30 days |
| Block-billed time paid at | 50% | Adjustable, as a new guideline version |
| Research approval needed above | 3.0 hours on one issue | Adjustable, as a new guideline version |
Every figure is labelled: a target the solution is built to, an estimate, a typical published result, or a proven one.
“demo” = seen in the working solution, on its sample invoices · “target” = the design goal, measured in the live solution · “estimated” = our estimate · “typical” = published figures (CAS / Triple-I, legal system abuse analysis, 2025, data to 2024 — $231.6B to $281.2B added to liability losses). LEDES 1998B is the LEDES Oversight Committee’s e-billing format and UTBMS the litigation code set; ABA Formal Opinion 01-421 is named as context. People, firms, the carrier, insureds and claimants named on this page are fictional — characters and sample data in the working solution.
Software that checks law-firm invoices against the insurer’s outside counsel billing guidelines, rate agreements and case budgets before they are paid. Legal Bill Review has seven agents read every line of every defense invoice, tag each break with its guideline section and budget phase, and write the reason the firm will see; the bill reviewer decides every reduction.
LEDES 1998B, LEDES XML and PDF invoices, arriving through e-billing or email. The invoice reader extracts each line with its timekeeper, UTBMS task and activity codes, hours, rate and amount, and recomputes every line and the total without changing a billed figure.
No. The agents judge only how the work is billed — block billing, vague entries, rates, staffing, research approvals, duplicates and expenses — never whether the work was needed. That stays with defense counsel. ABA Formal Opinion 01-421 discusses insurer billing guidelines and the tripartite relationship.
The budget tracker applies each invoice to the approved case budget by phase and carries the pace forward to the trial date. On Torres v. Brayford it shows the case passing its $175,000 budget on 19 Dec 2026 at the last three invoices’ pace, and drafts the request for a revised budget for the litigation specialist to approve.
The appeal reader checks each answer against the guideline and the approvals on file — such as a research approval email — and recommends accept or uphold. The reviewer decides each line, and appeals over $5,000 go to claims legal counsel.
Yes. Each guideline rule can be turned on or off and its parameters changed, as a new version claims legal counsel approves. Auto-approval for clean invoices, the reviewer’s reduction limit, the appeal threshold, payment terms and the budget projection pace are all settings.
Yes. Agents recommend; the reviewer applies, waives and approves, within a $25,000 reduction limit by default. Nothing goes to the firm without the reviewer, and every read, flag, decision and payment is on the audit trail.
The Agentic Solution Engine builds and deploys it from your requirements — your billing guidelines, rate agreements, budgets and a sample of past invoices — and it goes live once every quality gate has passed. We will walk you through it on your own defense invoices first.
Thousand-page demands read in full and answered before the deadline.
1-min demoTime-Limited Demand ManagementNo policy-limits deadline missed: every demand on a clock, every condition checked.
1-min demoBodily Injury Claim ValuationSettlement authority set from comparable closed files and local verdicts.
1-min demoWe’ll run Legal Bill Review on a sample of your own past defense invoices and guidelines.