Birkholz Law case study: a skeptic runs the numbers
Taliesen Burrows did not expect this to work. An attorney at Birkholz Law, a firm practicing criminal defense, family law, expungements, and gun rights restoration, he came into the firm's Ajax pilot with his guard up: "I really thought going into this, I'm like, you know, all of us AI, this is never going to work the way it is. I'm really going to keep track of my time."
He had earned the skepticism honestly: "I've dealt with AI now, multiple different ones, CoPilot, ChatGPT... They all have some major flaws with them... Ajax has really impressed me with how comprehensive it is."
Two and a half days in
The numbers moved him before the features did: "I've noticed just like in the last two and a half days, I've noticed pretty large differences in just additional time captured... I would probably say three hours worth of like .1s that I normally would never have captured."
Why did those tenths never get captured before? His explanation is the most honest description of under-billing you will hear: for a 30-second or one-minute email, typing up the time entry takes longer than the work itself was worth, so he just would not capture it. Ajax catching all of that and making it a one-click review changed the economics of the small stuff.
By week two the pattern had settled: "It's finally routinely, like, an hour of billable, plus all my non-billable that is still useful to have us tracked, so it's really nice." Even the late-night work stopped disappearing: "Like, just the captioning emails alone, to me, makes it worth it."
His verdict, as a self-described doubter: "I think the program works phenomenally. I mean, I came into this with a lot of doubts about how this program would work, and I was completely wrong. I'm glad to admit that, so."
The firm's view
Jacob Birkholz, the firm's principal, has put his own assessment of Ajax on the record: "This is the most direct-to-revenue app I've seen. It's not just a tool; it's a revenue-capturing system."
The firm even rethought who gets a seat. Burrows again: "So as a firm, we think it might be worth, because it's catching so much everywhere else, that we think it's probably still worth paying the fee for that one user to catch all that non-billable time, even if there's not a direct money correlation for them, everyone else will more than make up for that, so."
That is the shape of the math at a mixed practice: hourly matters recover hard dollars, and even the flat-fee and non-billable work becomes visible, which changes how the firm staffs and prices.
Frequently asked questions
What convinced a skeptic? Measured capture in his own numbers: roughly three hours of previously uncaptured 0.1s in his first two and a half days, settling into about an hour of extra billable time routinely.
Does Ajax also track non-billable time? Yes, and Birkholz Law found it valuable enough to justify a seat for a mostly non-billable user. Non-billable capture shows where the firm's time actually goes.
Does it work for criminal defense and family practices? Both run on frequent small interactions, which is where capture beats memory. See how firms stop losing billable hours.
Come skeptical. Book a demo and judge Ajax the way Burrows did, against your own captured time.
