Quick Verdict
Filevine at $150+/user/mo before add-ons offers deep workflow customization and enterprise scalability — but charges separately for intake (Lead Docket), eSign (VineSign), reporting (Domo), and AI, with non-cancelable annual contracts and migration costs of $1,250–$25,000+. CasePeer at $149/user/mo is a straightforward PI platform with proven plaintiff workflows and month-to-month flexibility — but has no AI and charges $1,000–$8,000 for migration. Filevine is more powerful but far more expensive; CasePeer is more focused but lacks modern capabilities.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Criteria |  |  |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing | $150+/user/mo + paid add-ons (Lead Docket, VineSign, Domo, AI all separate) | $149/user/mo |
| Contract | Non-cancelable annual contracts | Month-to-month available |
| Migration Cost | $1,250–$25,000+ depending on firm size and complexity | $1,000–$8,000 depending on data volume |
| Best For | Enterprise customization | Legacy PI adoption |
| Firm Type | Mid-size to Enterprise | Plaintiff PI |
| AI Depth | Moderate — AI is a paid add-on | None |
Key Differences
Filevine and CasePeer both serve plaintiff firms but at vastly different scales and price points. Filevine's base price of $150+/user/mo is deceptive because intake (Lead Docket), eSign (VineSign), reporting (Domo), and AI are all paid add-ons — a fully loaded Filevine setup frequently exceeds $250–$300/user/mo. Add migration costs of $1,250–$25,000+ and non-cancelable annual contracts, and the total commitment is substantial. CasePeer at $149/user/mo is more straightforward: proven PI workflows, settlement tracking, demand management, and month-to-month billing flexibility. Migration costs $1,000–$8,000, which is meaningful but far less than Filevine's range. The capability gap is real, though — Filevine's workflow engine is dramatically more customizable, its project management is better for complex multi-phase cases, and it has developing AI capabilities (as a paid add-on). CasePeer's interface is more dated and has no AI whatsoever. Neither platform includes AI in its base price for substantive legal tasks like medical chronology creation or demand drafting.
Strengths of Each
Filevine
- Highly customizable workflow engine for complex case types
- Enterprise scalability for growing firms
- Strong project management for multi-phase litigation
- Robust reporting via Domo (paid add-on)
CasePeer
- Proven PI-specific workflows and settlement tracking
- Month-to-month billing — no long-term lock-in
- Established track record with plaintiff firms
- Straightforward without enterprise complexity
Ideal Use Cases
Filevine
Mid-size to enterprise plaintiff firms with complex multi-phase workflows, dedicated ops staff, and a budget for add-ons and implementation.
CasePeer
Traditional PI firms that want proven plaintiff workflows without enterprise overhead, complex configurations, or add-on costs.
Final Recommendation
Choose Filevine if you are a mid-size to enterprise plaintiff firm with complex workflows, dedicated ops staff, and a budget for add-ons and implementation — the customization power justifies the premium for firms at that scale. Choose CasePeer if you are a smaller PI firm that wants proven plaintiff workflows with straightforward pricing and no long-term contracts. If you want deep AI capabilities integrated into plaintiff workflows without the enterprise overhead of Filevine or the limitations of CasePeer, consider newer purpose-built alternatives.