The migration must preserve the firm’s matter meaning without delaying a committed cutover.
Legal reviewers need proof for each high-impact mapping, while the implementation deadline leaves little room for a broader redesign.
Who you’d be doing this for
“The label looks familiar, but I need to see what it meant in their old file.”
Juma Ndungu · Personal-Injury Attorney
He reviews migrated active matters before relying on their structured case data for demand preparation.
What is at stake
Eighteen of 400 sampled mappings look correct but carry the wrong legal meaning. You have to weigh a nine-day cutover against review evidence attorneys can rely on.
Why it isn’t already fixed
Every obvious fix costs something else. That’s the part you’d have to decide.
- cutover commitment vs source-level proof
- review coverage vs legal judgment
- model confidence vs mapping meaning
- migration speed vs irreversible data quality
Why EvenUp
Piai turns migrated matter data into structured claims intelligence, so a plausible but wrong classification can shape downstream legal work across thousands of records.
Written with these in mind
Not your kind of problem? 15 more at EvenUp, or browse every organization.
This is the setup. The work is inside.
Running it puts you in the room: the full situation and its constraints, stakeholders who push back in their own words, and the decisions that are yours to make. What you produce becomes a Day One Plan — work you can show someone instead of describing.