Brian Mittman: leveling the playing field in disability law
Disability law, medical evidence, and disciplined workflows when the outcome depends on getting the record right.
Listen →Superinsight blog
Field notes on medical records and the cases they decide
Buyer’s guides, published pricing, case studies, and conversations with the attorneys and advocates who read these files for a living.
Latest episode
Christopher Pozios: from burnout to balance
Luke Connally and Nelson Chu talk with Christopher Pozios about scaling a disability practice intentionally: lean operations, workflow design, and growth that does not cost your clarity or your health.
Listen to the episode →Beyond the Case Files
Customer stories
Conversations with legal and medical professionals about how the work actually gets done.
Dawud “D.K.” Shillingford: from boots to veteran advocacy
After 24 years in the Air Force and leadership roles at Deloitte and the SEC, D.K. found a new calling helping veterans cut through the red tape.
Listen →
Paul Bunn: faith, purpose, and rebuilding veterans’ lives
A 20-year Army veteran on the road from homelessness to helping secure billions in compensation for other veterans.
Listen →
Katie Reed: family, resilience, and the firm’s AI research lead
An attorney at McMahan Law on putting AI to work on medical records in a high-volume practice without losing the human side of advocacy.
Listen →
Diane Haar: disability justice across the Pacific
The founder of Hawai‘i Disability Legal Services on running a paperless, remote-first firm so geography does not decide who gets represented.
Listen →
Scott Haider: from discovering law to reclaiming time
The owner of Schneider Law Firm on disability and personal injury work at volume, and why malpractice risk pushed him toward structured review.
Listen →Guides
How the work gets done
Methods, templates, and the questions to ask before you hand a file to anyone, whether the reader is software or a person.
What is an AI Medical Chronology?
What a medical chronology is, why it has always been hard to build, and what AI has to get right, with an interactive sample case.
Read →How to create a medical chronology
The seven-step method, the four-column template, and what changes when software does the extraction instead of a reviewer.
Read →Medical record review software for PI firms
What a plaintiff firm should test before it buys: verifiable findings, review responsibilities, data terms, and the true cost.
Read →How to choose medical chronology software
Features, costs, and implementation: a framework for matching software to how your firm already works.
Read →Medical chronology services: a guide for law firms
AI versus manual services, what each costs, and how to tell which one a given case actually calls for.
Read →Medical record review: best practices for attorneys
Systematic approaches, technology integration, and the privacy obligations that come with moving records around.
Read →When a record review vendor gets it wrong
A missed record cost one firm $2.3 million. What went wrong, and the diligence that would have caught it.
Read →AI and the five-step sequential evaluation
How structured record review maps onto the SSA’s evaluation process, step by step, and where the time actually goes.
Read →Why disability firms miss ERE updates
Missed ERE updates are a systems problem, not an attention problem. What automated monitoring changes.
Read →Comparisons
Pricing and vendor comparisons
Published prices where we could find them, and a plain accounting of what each contract commits you to.
AI medical record review pricing in 2026
Published prices, billing models, and the costs beyond the software fee, compared across the tools firms evaluate.
Read →Best AI tools for medical chronology: 2026 guide
Outputs, review workflows, and published pricing across the medical chronology tools legal teams are evaluating this year.
Read →EvenUp alternatives for medical chronologies
Who publishes a price, what the contract commits you to, and who checks the chronology before it reaches your inbox.
Read →EvenUp vs. Filevine vs. Digital Owl
Three of the most-evaluated platforms side by side on output, turnaround, and what each one asks you to commit to.
Read →Best AI tools for medical chronology: 2025 guide
The earlier survey of the market, kept online for reference. Start with the 2026 guide for current pricing.
Read →Case studies
What changed for the firms using it
Five practices, five different bottlenecks, and an honest look at where the tooling helped and where it did not.
Veterans advocacy: medical records at scale
Trust-but-verify QA on massive files, and a clear-eyed test of whether throughput and issue-spotting cover the subscription.
Read →A nonprofit veterans shop and its cost model
Multi-track VA dockets need grounded chronology plus narrative tools. The article walks the model and the budget caveats.
Read →One medical spine across PI, comp, and SSD
Structured passes on longitudinal charts, verification against source PDFs, and hearing prep that stopped capping the calendar.
Read →Solo SSD practice: record layer versus drafting
Why even a heavy LLM user buys a maintained record product instead of babysitting brittle custom prompts.
Read →An ALJ-heavy practice and its prep sink
Summarizing medical evidence dominates hearing prep. Structured output as a map for the targeted deep read.
Read →Industry analysis
The systems behind the paperwork
Where the record volume comes from, who is required to read it, and what the public data says about the pressure.
The California compensation market
WCIRB loss data, QME capacity limits, and 7,000+ self-insured employers explain why the problem is volume, not litigation alone.
Read →The Texas compensation market
Optional coverage splits Texas in two: subscriber admin claims and non-subscriber tort litigation, with very different record demands.
Read →QME vs. AME vs. IME
How California’s panel-based QME and mutual AME routes differ from the national IME model, and what happens in a dispute.
Read →Modernizing med-legal practice workflows
Manual page logging, ex parte rules, AMA impairment math, and 30-day reporting deadlines all create drag on evaluators.
Read →Not every case needs a testifying expert
Merit review, peer second opinion, and retained testifying expert serve different purposes, at very different costs.
Read →Newsletter
Get new posts by email
New guides, pricing updates, and episodes as they publish. No more than a couple of emails a month.
Try it on a real file
Read a chronology of your own case
Upload a case and read the chronology yourself. The evaluation costs nothing and there is no limit on cases or pages.