PlaintiffStack vs Litify

What Litify is

Litify was founded in 2016 by a team from Morgan & Morgan and is built on Salesforce, with documents in its own Docrio system on AWS. Bessemer Venture Partners took a majority stake in 2023. Litify sells to high-volume plaintiff firms, insurance defense firms, immigration firms and corporate legal teams, and it has moved quickly on AI in 2026.

• Damages Assistant (October 2025), built with Supio.
• ACE, the Agentic Case Expert (March 31, 2026), which analyzes matter data, flags risks and runs multi-step workflows inside the platform.
• Instant Demands (June 23, 2026), which drafts a demand narrative and a cited exhibit packet from firm templates. Litify says it leans on Supio for document analysis, fact extraction and first drafts, and it can start once tracked damages reach a set level against policy limits. An attorney reviews before anything goes to the carrier.

PlaintiffStack is one record for California plaintiff firms: personal injury, workers' comp and employment, with intake, documents, drafting and the client portal on the same case. See the product.

Where Litify is strong

Litify's strengths come from Salesforce. Firms can model almost anything, report on it, and connect to the Salesforce ecosystem. Large firms with systems staff use that to build exactly the workflow they want. Litify also has SOC 2 Type I and Type II reports, and the Supio partnership puts a well-regarded records engine inside the case system. If you are a multi-state firm with admins and a budget for implementation, Litify is a reasonable first look. For how it stacks up against the other enterprise options, see Filevine vs Litify and Litify vs SmartAdvocate.

Where PlaintiffStack differs

California practice, not a build. PlaintiffStack's workers' comp cases come with QME and WCAB pages, a benefits audit, a QME cover letter and records index, WCAB petition drafting, and checks for unpaid certified disability and IMR deadlines. Employment cases come with a legal chronology, a wage and penalty audit and right-to-sue deadline checks. On Litify these would be designed and built for your firm.

Something a case manager can run. Reviewers describe Litify's setup as complex and its learning curve as steep without strong admin support. PlaintiffStack's admins add pages, fields and phases by describing them to an assistant and approving the exact change, and every change is audit-logged. See Customize.

AI on one bill you can see. Agents propose facts, deadlines and tasks; a person accepts them. Drafts cite the page each fact came from. Each run shows an estimated cost first, typically cents, and usage is billed separately as part of your quote.

Where we're behind. PlaintiffStack has no OCR yet, so scans and faxes aren't read. It has no trust accounting, no SOC 2 report yet (Type II is in progress), and fewer integrations: Word and Dropbox are live, RingCentral is in early access. It follows California rules only.

Cost and implementation

Litify doesn't publish prices. A third-party comparison reports 20-license minimums and five-figure implementation fees before a firm opens a case; treat that as an estimate and ask Litify for its own numbers, including the LitifyAI line items. Reviewers on Capterra describe hard implementations and, in some cases, blame the implementation partner.

PlaintiffStack is $250 per case, every app included, no monthly fee and no long lock-in contract, with AI usage billed separately. We move your cases, contacts and documents and check the result with you. The per-case vs per-seat guide shows how the two models compare as headcount and intake change.

Who should pick which

Pick Litify if you are a large firm, practice in several states, have systems staff, and want Salesforce as your foundation. Pick PlaintiffStack if you are a California volume firm that wants PI, comp and employment ready on day one, a price you can read on a web page, and AI that shows its sources. If demand drafting is your main question, compare PlaintiffStack vs Supio too, since Supio powers Litify's demands.