Neither Filevine nor Litify publishes a price, so the honest way to compare them is to compare what each quote will be built from, then hold both quotes against a vendor that does print a number. Read on 27 September 2026, Filevine's pricing page lists four packages (Matters, Intake, Depositions and Signatures) and ends with a custom quote form, and litify.com/pricing redirects straight to a demo request. The closest personal injury platform with a printed price is CasePeer, at $130 per user a month for the tier that includes intake. For a ten person firm that is $15,600 a year, and it is the figure to put in front of both sales teams.
Filevine details come from filevine.com/pricing and its intake and lead tracking page, read on 27 September 2026. Litify details come from litify.com, read the same day. CasePeer figures come from casepeer.com/pricing, read on 22 September 2026. Figures from comparison sites are labeled as such and are not vendor prices.
Filevine vs Litify pricing at a glance
| Filevine | Litify | |
|---|---|---|
| Published price | None. "Contact our sales team for a custom quote" | None. The pricing address redirects to a demo request form |
| How it is sold | Packages: Matters, Intake, Depositions, Signatures, plus extensions | One platform with intake, matter, document, time and billing, spend and reporting modules |
| Built on | Filevine's own platform, hosted on AWS | Salesforce, with AWS and Anthropic named as infrastructure |
| Intake product | Lead Docket, Lead Docket Automation and Leads AI, sold as the Intake package | Intake management with dynamic questionnaires and voice agents |
| Setup | Certified Implementation Partners | Not described on the pages we read |
| Free option | LOIS Explore, an AI research tier without case management | Demo only |
| Comparison site figure (unsourced) | $150 or more per user a month before add ons | $165 to $330 per user a month including Salesforce, 10 to 20 seat minimum |
How much does Filevine cost?
Filevine does not say. Its pricing FAQ asks "How does Filevine pricing work?" and answers that each organization is unique and the team will tailor a cost-effective and scalable plan. What the page does show is the shape of the quote: a Matters package (matter management, document management, document assembly and payments), optional extensions (Periscope analytics, Timely court deadlines, a client portal, DataBridge and integrations), and three further packages for intake, depositions and signatures.
That structure matters more than any single number, because a Filevine quote grows by package. A firm that buys Matters and later adds Intake is paying for two products, and Filevine does not publish a figure for either. One comparison site, LegalTech Ranked, states Filevine starts at $150 or more per user a month before add ons and puts migration at $1,250 to $25,000 or more. It cites no source. SelectHub, another directory, simply lists Filevine as custom quote. Treat the $150 figure as a rumor you can test, not a budget line.
How much does Litify cost?
Litify does not say either, and it is harder to find out than Filevine. Its pricing address does not even load a pricing page: it redirects to the demo request form. The homepage describes a single platform for law firms and corporate legal departments, with intake management, matter management, document management, time and billing, spend management and reporting, built on the infrastructure of Salesforce, AWS and Anthropic.
The Salesforce foundation is the key cost fact. Any Litify quote has to account for the underlying platform licensing and for configuration work on it. LegalTech Ranked puts Litify at $165 to $330 per user a month including the Salesforce license, with 10 to 20 seat minimums and implementation from $10,000 to more than $250,000. Again, no source is cited, and Litify publishes none of it. If a seat minimum really applies, it changes the math for a small firm more than the per user rate does, so ask about it first. If you are still deciding whether to book the Litify demo at all, our Litify alternative comparison sets it against CasePeer, Filevine, SmartAdvocate and CloudLex on what each vendor actually publishes.
Filevine vs Litify vs CasePeer cost by firm size
The table below puts the one published number in this category next to what the comparison site figures would imply. Only the CasePeer column is a real price. The other two columns multiply unsourced figures and are there to show what the rumors add up to, so you can see whether a quote is high or low against them.
| Firm size | CasePeer Pro (published, $130) | Filevine at $150 (comparison site, unsourced) | Litify at $165 with a 10 seat minimum (comparison site, unsourced) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3 users | $390 a month, $4,680 a year | $450 a month, $5,400 a year | $1,650 a month, $19,800 a year |
| 5 users | $650 a month, $7,800 a year | $750 a month, $9,000 a year | $1,650 a month, $19,800 a year |
| 10 users | $1,300 a month, $15,600 a year | $1,500 a month, $18,000 a year | $1,650 a month, $19,800 a year |
| 20 users | $2,600 a month, $31,200 a year | $3,000 a month, $36,000 a year | $3,300 a month, $39,600 a year |
Two things stand out. First, if the seat minimum is real, a three person firm would pay for ten Litify seats, which is why Litify is usually described as a fit for larger firms. Second, none of the three columns includes implementation, migration or the separate Intake package on Filevine. Those are one time or add on costs that the quote has to spell out.
Which is cheaper, Filevine or Litify?
On the comparison site figures, Filevine is cheaper per user and has no stated seat minimum, which makes it the lower cost of the two for a firm under ten people. Neither vendor confirms any figure, so the only way to know is to get both written quotes over the same term and the same modules, including intake.
The fair comparison is module for module. If you want intake on Filevine, the quote needs the Intake package (Lead Docket, with or without Leads AI). If you want intake on Litify, confirm which intake features and voice agents are in the base configuration. Firms that already use Salesforce for marketing or referrals sometimes find Litify's platform cost easier to justify, because some of that spend already exists.
What each platform's intake actually does
Both vendors pitch intake as a reason to buy, so check what the intake does on its own. Filevine's intake page says Lead Docket connects with leads in under 60 seconds: when a lead arrives by web form, live chat or an after hours call, it sends automated SMS and email follow ups straight away. It also collects consultation fees or retainer deposits by card or ACH, reports which marketing sources produce signed cases and uses AI to summarize and prioritize leads. What it does not describe is the software holding the qualifying conversation and booking the consultation. The follow up goes out and your intake team does the rest.
Litify describes dynamic questionnaires and voice agents that help your team convert consults into signed clients, and an online portal for the client. Its public pages do not say which of those are included in a base license. In both cases, the question to ask on the demo is the same: when a prospective client fills in our website form at 10 at night, what happens in the next five minutes, and who books the consultation?
What if intake is the only problem you are trying to solve?
Plenty of personal injury firms start pricing Filevine or Litify because signed cases are slipping, then find the case system was not the cause. The leak was at the front door: a web inquiry nobody saw until morning, a caller who reached voicemail, a form that asked the right questions and then sat in a queue. A platform migration does not fix that on its own, and it takes months.
Consultations does that one job. It runs the intake conversation on your website at any hour, asks the screening questions your firm defines (date of the incident, treatment so far, liability facts, insurance, whether another firm is already involved), checks the answers against your criteria, collects photos or a police report and books the consultation onto your calendar. The attorney gets a structured brief, and the record exports into whatever case system you keep, Filevine and Litify included. It handles intake and scheduling only, never legal advice.
The price is on the page, flat per firm and not per user: Solo is $49 a month for one attorney, Practice is $129 a month for up to five professionals with document collection and qualification rules per practice area, and Firm is $299 a month for up to twenty with voice intake and advanced integrations. Pay monthly with no annual term, or once a year at half the monthly price. For a five person firm, Practice costs $1,548 a year, against $7,800 for five CasePeer Pro seats. If you are weighing a full platform switch mainly for intake, our Filevine alternative comparison sets out every competitor's published price side by side, and the legal software pricing guide covers the wider field.
Questions to ask on the Filevine and Litify demos
- What is the per user monthly price for the modules we need, and is there a seat minimum?
- Is intake (Lead Docket and Leads AI on Filevine, intake management and voice agents on Litify) in the base price or quoted separately?
- What is the one time cost of implementation and data migration, and who does the work?
- On Litify, how is the Salesforce license priced, and what happens if we already hold Salesforce seats?
- What is the contract term, and what happens to the price at renewal?
- When a web lead arrives after hours, does the software book the consultation, or does it only send a follow up?
Get every answer in writing, over the same term, before you compare. The same discipline applies across this category; our SmartAdvocate pricing breakdown works through another quote only vendor, and the Lead Docket vs GrowPath pricing comparison looks at Filevine's intake product against a rival.
Beyond the case system
Litify also sells to corporate legal departments, and for those teams the bigger line in the budget is often not matters at all but agreements: vendor contracts, NDAs and renewals that nobody tracks until they auto renew. If that is the evaluation you are really running, a dedicated contract management software covers it without a Salesforce license underneath.
For a plaintiff firm, though, the cheaper fix and the faster one is usually the front door. You can run the intake conversation at the top of this page right now and see exactly what a prospective client would see before you book a single demo.
See how Consultations runs intake for your field on the use cases page.