title: How Reibman & Hall cut intake response time from 4 hours to 90 seconds slug: reibman-hall-cut-intake-time date: "2026-03-17" category: Case Studies author: head-of-product dek: A 14-attorney plaintiff PI firm in Phoenix replaced FileVine, Smith.ai's old portal, and one full FTE — and watched their intake-to-retainer rate jump 41% in the first quarter. tags:
- Case Studies
- Intake
- AI
Reibman & Hall is a 14-attorney plaintiff personal-injury firm in Phoenix. Like most firms in their cohort, their 2024 intake stack had four moving pieces: Smith.ai's legacy receptionist portal for after-hours calls, FileVine for matter management, a spreadsheet for lead triage, and a paralegal whose full-time job was making sure none of the pieces lost track of each other.
In Q4 2025 they migrated to Legasus over an eight-day cutover window. The Q1 2026 numbers tell the story.
Before / after, by the numbers
| Metric | Q3 2025 | Q1 2026 |
|---|---|---|
| Median intake response time | 4h 12m | 1m 28s |
| Intake-to-consult conversion | 36% | 51% |
| Consult-to-retainer rate | 41% | 58% |
| Quarterly retainer count | 187 | 264 |
| FTE on intake operations | 2.0 | 1.0 |
The 41% jump in retainer rate is the headline. The story underneath the headline is that the firm did not work harder; they worked on the right leads sooner.
What changed operationally
Receptionist hand-off is one click, not three
The Smith.ai → FileVine → spreadsheet hand-off used to take Reibman & Hall's intake paralegal about 12 minutes per lead in good cases and 45 minutes in cases where the receptionist's notes were ambiguous. With Intake AI, the receptionist's transcript becomes a structured intake record automatically; the paralegal verifies and routes in under 90 seconds.
The 4-hour median response time was not the receptionist's fault. It was the time between when the lead came in and when a human got to the bottom of the spreadsheet. The new median is the time between when the call ends and when the lead-detail panel is open in front of an attorney.
Routing is a vector, not a vibe
The firm runs the six-dimensional lead scoring model we ship out of the box. Their managing partner reviews the dimension distribution weekly and adjusts the routing thresholds per practice area. The intake paralegal no longer makes routing decisions — the engine does, and the partner is in the loop on the rules.
One platform, one audit log
Where the firm used to maintain three different audit trails (Smith.ai's, FileVine's, and the spreadsheet's), they now have one. The audit trail is the same audit trail the partners review during quarterly malpractice exposure reviews. It is also the audit trail that the firm's E&O insurer reviews during annual renewal.
"We did not appreciate how much operational tax we were paying on having three systems instead of one until we did not have to pay it anymore. The retainer rate jump is real, but the bigger story is that we have one platform of record now and our partners spend a lot less time being air traffic controllers."
— Marisol Reibman, Managing Partner, Reibman & Hall
What we learned watching the migration
The 8-day migration plan we publish is the same plan we ran for Reibman & Hall. The thing that surprised us in their case was how fast the operational change compounded once the data lived in one place. The intake paralegal who used to do 12 minutes of hand-off per lead is now spending that time on consults — which directly drives the consult-to-retainer rate.
The firm has not yet rolled out Calendar Copilot for direct booking; that is on the roadmap for Q2 2026. They expect another step-change in the consult-conversion metric when they do.
See the full case study
The full case study is on the Customers page with the deeper version of the metrics, the migration timeline, and the operational changes. If you want to see whether the same playbook fits your firm, book a 30-minute demo on your firm's data.