Customer Stories

Katie Mast is a senior paralegal at Varghese Summersett PLLC in Texas. Drawing on experience across plaintiff personal injury matters, Mast and her team had developed a disciplined process for evaluating case value based on the medical record, anticipated future care, and the broader impact of an injury on the client. During the Previdi Mini Beta, she compared that process with Previdi on a high-value personal injury matter.

The matter involved significant injuries and an extensive treatment history. Based on the firm’s review of the records, current medical expenses, future care needs, and pain and suffering considerations, the team had already developed a strong internal assessment of the case.

After the records were entered into Previdi, RangeFinder returned a projected value range that aligned with the firm’s assessment while extending above the upper end the team had been considering.

“The low part of the range was in the range that we valued it at. It was a little higher, and that was nice to see. It solidified our thoughts that this was a fairly high-value case.”

The team was not looking to Previdi to replace its judgment. It already understood the case and had a clear view of its potential value. What Previdi provided was an additional, data-informed perspective that reinforced the team’s assessment and suggested there may be room to pursue a higher outcome.

“I don’t think we needed too much extra help on this one, but it made us more confident in the numbers we were seeking.”

That added confidence carried directly into case strategy. With Previdi upporting the firm’s existing assessment, Mast and her team felt better prepared to move the matter into litigation.

“It made us more confident to take it to litigation.”

Beyond valuation, Mast found value in how Previdi organized the client’s future care needs. Future Recommendations separated completed treatment from outstanding recommendations, giving the team a focused view of what still needed to be considered as the case progressed.

“Future Recommendations takes out everything the client has already completed. It gives us a clear view of what is still ahead and what the client may need for treatment going forward.”

The Injury Diagnosis feature and Activities of Daily Living summary added further context. In a record-heavy case, bringing those findings together made it easier to review the full picture, prepare demands, and help anyone joining the matter quickly understand its key details.

“The diagnoses and the ADLs summarize everything so well. It helps with our demands and gives us more confidence going into litigation. If someone is picking up the file, it’s all right there.”

For Mast, one of Previdi’s most practical advantages was continuity. Information gathered during early case evaluation remained useful through demand preparation, litigation, and expert services. Rather than rebuilding the case story at each stage, the team could work from one organized view.

“It’s a tool we can use pre-litigation and take with us into litigation. We can move into an expert care plan or another expert product, and it’s all in one place.”

That continuity also simplified the transition to PLCP Expert Services. Having coordinated life care plans at previous firms, Mast noted the difference immediately.

“At my previous firm, I would have to call and say, ‘Help me, I have a new case.’ This was much smoother. Having it all in one place made the process really easy.”

Previdi did not replace the team’s understanding of the case. It strengthened it. The platform validated the firm’s assessment, revealed a higher potential ceiling, and organized the information needed to prepare for litigation with greater confidence.

The result was a clearer, more complete view that the entire legal team could carry into the next stage of the case.

Darius Crayton is a plaintiff personal injury attorney at Farris, Riley & Pitt in Alabama. Years of trial experience had given him a strong instinct for estimated future medical costs of a case. When evaluating a serious head-on collision case, however, he wanted additional context to support the number he had in mind.

Crayton developed an initial assessment drawing on several factors: the severity of his client’s injuries, the amount of coverage available, and his firsthand read of what Alabama juries had historically returned on cases of this type. It was an informed estimate, built from years of local trial experience.

He trusted that judgment, but acknowledged that it was not based on a formal comparison to similar cases.

"It wasn't really based on scientific or really comparing it to other cases or numbers or anything like that. It was just really kind of what I felt."

After the case was evaluated in Previdi, RangeFinder returned a benchmarked estimated future medical cost range informed by comparable injuries and outcomes from decades of physician-evaluated case data.

The result did not just broadly align with Crayton’s estimate. It landed nearly on top of it, and extended above his upper threshold, suggesting the case may have been undervalued.

"For Previdi to really back that up and tell me basically exactly what I was looking at... that was good enough for me. It really told me that I was kind of on the right track with this one."

More than simply confirming a number, RangeFinder gave Crayton broader context for how comparable cases had been evaluated. That perspective helped turn an experience-based estimate into a more informed and defensible position.

The impact on Crayton's settlement strategy was immediate. Instead of presenting a range based on judgment alone, he could enter conversations with added support for his position.

"It gave me a lot more confidence in my conversations with the insurance company. I was kind of saying that's what I thought the case may have been worth. But now I can really speak with a lot more confidence."

Crayton approached negotiations with greater clarity around the case and more confidence in the value he was advocating for.

The evaluation also influenced the broader case strategy. After reviewing the Previdi findings, Crayton and his team began seriously considering a life care plan to better understand the client’s potential future care needs and support the next phase of the case.

Crayton had also graduated his Previdi case evaluations into the PLCP Expert Services process. He described the transition from a Previdi to PLCP as straightforward and well supported.

"It is very seamless. You're contacted almost immediately by a team member looking to help you out. They tell you exactly what they need from you. The process is really seamless."

For Crayton, Previdi did not replace professional judgment. It gave him a way to test it, strengthen it, and move forward with greater confidence.

"It's worth it to use Previdi to, at the very least, double check what you're already thinking about the value of your case. Because a lot of times you can have one value in your head and then you look at similar cases, similar injuries, similar clients, and it could completely change it or it can reaffirm what you're already thinking. Getting a second opinion, especially from one from Previdi that has all this information and knowledge they can pull from, it can only go to help your case."

James C. Mattox III is a partner at the Mattox Law Firm in Texas. Drawing on experience across commercial and non-commercial auto cases, Mattox had developed a reliable framework for assessing case value. During the Previdi Mini Beta, he tested that framework on a rideshare injury matter and came away with a materially different assessment than the one he started with.

The client had been injured in a rideshare accident and came to the firm with several documented injuries. Based on his initial review and how treatment was progressing, Mattox formed an early assessment of the case's potential value.

After the records were evaluated in Previdi, RangeFinder returned a projected range notably above what Mattox had initially considered, suggesting the case carried more value than his first assessment had captured. The evaluation also surfaced injuries that had not been fully accounted for in his first review.

"Based on what I saw in Previdi, I had evaluated it lower than what Previdi showed. I trusted Previdi's evaluation because of the depth of experience and information behind it."

The most immediate impact was not simply a higher range. Previdi helped Mattox identify injuries that he believed might otherwise have received attention later in the case.

"Because of Previdi, I was able to pinpoint some injuries that might have been discovered later down the road. Instead, we caught them at the beginning of the case and were able to coordinate with the client's doctors to make sure they were being addressed properly."

With those issues surfaced earlier, Mattox was able to alert his team, follow up on the client's care, and reassess the case before it progressed further. The findings also prompted him to connect with PLCP about an expert review of the file, turning an earlier discussion into a concrete next step.

The way Previdi organized the case was a key part of making those findings actionable. Case value, injury details, potential concerns, and supporting records were brought together in one clear view instead of requiring Mattox to piece them together across the file.

"The dashboard puts everything in front of you, so it's hard to miss. It shows the value of the case, the injuries, and anything you should be alerted to. Then you can use Previdi IQ to dig deeper when you need to."

That visibility changed how Mattox and his team approached the matter from the outset. Instead of waiting for treatment or valuation gaps to emerge later, they were positioned to address them while there was still time to shape the case strategy.

Mattox also identified Previdi's injury and diagnosis insights as particularly useful for the attorneys, paralegals, and other team members responsible for negotiating with insurance carriers.

"That's a great tool, not only for lawyers, but also for paralegals or whoever negotiates the case. You can pinpoint the injuries and use the dashboard to help explain what matters when you are talking with an adjuster."

The path from a Previdi evaluation to PLCP Expert Services was also easy to follow. After a brief walkthrough, Mattox felt the platform clearly guided the user through the steps required to bring in additional expert support.

For Mattox, Previdi did more than confirm a number. It surfaced issues earlier, strengthened his assessment, and helped his team take action while those insights could still influence the direction of the case. In a practice where insurance carriers already rely on sophisticated systems, that kind of structured intelligence helps plaintiff firms evaluate cases and negotiate with greater authority.

Valentina Diaz is a paralegal at Greenberg Streich whose experience is rooted more in litigation than in medical record review or treatment management. When her firm began using Previdi, she saw an opportunity to quickly get up to speed on a complex Jones Act matter that had transferred to the firm and make sure the team was not overlooking anything before mediation.

The matter involved a client injured in a maritime accident who was pursuing a claim under the Jones Act. These cases present unique challenges because medical treatment, approval disputes, and future care recommendations can all play an important role in how the case is evaluated.

The client had already received significant treatment and had recommendations for additional care, including surgery. With some treatment approvals still being disputed and mediation approaching, the firm needed a clearer view of the medical history, outstanding recommendations, and overall case picture.

Because the matter had transferred with the firm, Diaz had not been involved from the beginning. She needed a practical way to understand the treatment history, identify potential gaps in the records, and confirm that the file was as complete as possible before mediation.

The supervising attorney had already developed an assessment based on experience with Jones Act matters and comparable injuries. Previdi gave the team an additional point of reference while helping them examine the case for details that might otherwise be easy to miss.

After the records were uploaded, RangeFinder returned a projected future medical cost range that aligned with the supervising attorney’s expectations based on the injuries, treatment history, and recommended future care.

The most immediately actionable finding, however, came from the case timeline. Previdi surfaced a gap of several months between treatment visits that Diaz had not previously identified.

"That made us realize either A, we're missing records for that timeframe or B, he just wasn't followed up on with his treatment or he missed appointments and things like that. So that was able to bring us up to speed on his case to confirm if we were missing anything."

That finding gave Diaz and her team a clear next step: determine whether records were missing or whether there had been an interruption in treatment. Resolving that question before mediation helped the team strengthen the completeness of the case file.

Previdi also captured surgical recommendations that had not yet been completed. One of those recommendations was later approved, reinforcing the team’s confidence that the platform had accurately identified an important part of the client’s potential future care.

“It did say that was a recommendation that we thought was going to help evaluate the case a little bit higher. The fact that it captured it, recommended it, and he was ultimately approved for it gave us confidence.”

Previdi did not change the firm’s overall direction. Mediation was already planned, and the broader strategy was in place. What changed was the team’s confidence that the treatment history, recommendations, and potential gaps had been fully considered.

“It gave us confidence in what we were seeing and helped make sure we had captured everything for the client. We wanted to make sure we were on track with what we expected, and we were.”

With the treatment gap identified and future care recommendations confirmed, the team could approach mediation with a more complete record and fewer unanswered questions.

The matter was already connected to a PLCP life care plan. Reviewing it through Previdi gave the team another way to assess what had been captured and what might still need to be addressed.

Because the records were already organized in the platform, Diaz and her team could more easily determine whether additional documentation or services might be needed for PLCP to consider an update to the plan.

“Being able to go back, we can now see whether we need an additional product or additional records for the life care expert to consider updating the life care plan.”

Diaz’s experience also demonstrated how Previdi can support professionals across the legal team, not only those with extensive medical record or treatment-management experience. The platform helped her engage with a complex medical timeline and understand the significance of treatment recommendations without requiring a clinical background.

“For someone who does not have a strong medical records or client treatment background, this helped me catch things I may not have noticed at the beginning. It has been very easy to understand and very well put together. Coming from the litigation side, I have been able to keep up with it and understand what is going on.”

That accessibility matters. A platform that only serves attorneys with deep medical records experience captures a fraction of its potential value. One that works for the full legal team captures it all.

For Diaz, Previdi’s value was not about replacing the team’s judgment or changing an established strategy. It was about helping the team verify that the case was complete, surface questions early, and enter mediation with greater confidence. On a complex Jones Act matter heading into mediation, that kind of thoroughness is not incidental. It is the work.