Weisberg & Weisberg case study: an 82x return
Weisberg & Weisberg is a Virginia firm run by its founding partners, Noah and Amy Weisberg. The practice is split in a way that makes it an unusually good test of AI timekeeping: fast-paced family law billed by the hour, and criminal defense billed flat-fee.
For years, manual timekeeping was a source of friction on both sides. The family law team was under-billing, because it is impossible to manually recall every task from a chaotic day. And the flat-fee criminal work lacked the detailed records needed to show clients the value behind the fee.
The pilot
The firm ran Ajax with eight team members. During setup, the Ajax team wrote custom rules for each user, which made the drafted entries accurate from the first days, and adoption was immediate because the team could see it made their timekeeping easier and more accurate at the same time.
The result the Weisbergs published with us:
Measure | Result |
|---|---|
Additional captured billable value per user, per day | +$639 |
Return on investment | 82x |
One detail from inside the average: a paralegal who had struggled with under-billing was suddenly capturing $400 more each day, nearly two hours of real work she had previously been missing.
Amy Weisberg's own summary: "I am absolutely loving it. It is very agile when it comes to grasping how I flip between cases, and that's a lot of the time that I was probably missing."
The flat-fee angle
Noah Weisberg's favorite part has nothing to do with hourly billing. His criminal defense practice is flat-fee, so capturing more hours does not change his revenue at all. He keeps an Ajax seat anyway, because the detailed, contemporaneous narratives it drafts show clients exactly what their fee bought, matter by matter, day by day.
That is worth pausing on. Client trust in a flat-fee practice runs on visible work, and a complete record of the work is exactly what screen-level capture produces, whether or not an invoice depends on it.
His overall take on the product is one we have quoted before: "I love this product. I think it's going to be a powerful product that every firm is going to need."
Frequently asked questions
Does Ajax make sense for flat-fee practices? Yes, for a different reason than hourly ones. Flat-fee firms use Ajax's records for client transparency and for knowing whether their fees actually match the work, the way Weisberg & Weisberg does on its criminal defense side.
What drove the 82x return? Chronic under-billers capturing the time they had actually worked: an average of $639 more per user per day, measured across the pilot.
How long did accuracy take? Days, not weeks. Custom per-user rules were written during onboarding, so entries drafted in each person's style from the start. More on the rollout rhythm in what to expect from an Ajax pilot.
If half your practice is flat-fee and half is hourly, Ajax pays you twice: once in captured time, once in client trust. Book a demo to see both.
