Written for the clinician who's already getting pitched by three of these platforms a quarter and wants the honest breakdown before sending a CV anywhere. Peer tone. Sourced pricing where public. "Contact for quote" flagged where the platform won't publish.
There are three business models in expert-witness platforms. Most experts evaluate them as if they're substitutes — they're not. Two of them compete for your annual marketing budget. One of them competes for your hourly engagement. The third (us) competes for the time you spend AFTER the call lands. Pick the right one by understanding which problem each one is actually solving for you.
Join the MedLegal AI network → Jump to comparison tableYou pay an annual fee, you get a profile in their directory, you hope attorneys find you. The directory does no matching, no vetting, no introduction — it's a yellow-pages page with SEO.
Examples: SEAK ($655/yr standard listing), JurisPro ($399/yr, no cut of hourly), HG Experts ($295–$550/yr premium), JD.MD, Medilex, ALM Experts (law.com), Experts.comFree for experts to join. They market to law firms, the firm pays them a search/engagement fee, they introduce you. The firm sees a marked-up engagement total; you generally bill your full rate. The broker's fee makes the engagement more expensive to the firm than hiring you direct.
Examples: Expert Institute (engagements from $3,500/search per their published pricing), Round Table Group (finder's fee added to expert's rate, paid by firm), TASA Group, ForensisGroupWe sell you the software you USE on a case after the call lands — AI records intake, Daubert template generator, deposition prep, chronology builder. Network listing on /experts is free and bundled. No referral fee, no cut, no markup. Non-exclusive.
Pricing: $49/mo Pro (1 seat) · $249/mo Professional (5 seats) · $499/mo Firm (20 seats) · $19 pay-per-analysisWhat each model actually costs the expert, and what each model actually does. Where a platform's price is not publicly disclosed, this table says so — we don't fabricate competitor numbers.
| Feature | Pay-to-list directories (SEAK, JurisPro, HG, JD.MD, ALM) |
Broker / referral (Expert Institute, Round Table, TASA, ForensisGroup) |
MedLegal AI |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cost to expert | $295–$655/yr (SEAK, JurisPro, HG published) | $0 to join | $0 for listing on /experts · $49/mo for workflow SaaS |
| Cut of your hourly | 0% (JurisPro: "we do not take a portion of your hourly rate") | Firm pays broker on top of your rate (finder's fee or search fee, varies) | 0% — no broker fee, no markup, no engagement cut |
| Time to get listed | Days to weeks (manual editorial review) | Weeks (vetting interview + reference checks) | ~1 week (credential verification only) |
| AI records intake (2,000 pages → Bates-cited chronology) | Not offered | Expert Institute offers paid Medical Chronologies for attorneys (separate service, custom pricing); experts do not have access as a workflow tool | Included in $49/mo — 40 min typical |
| Daubert challenge support (template generator for your opinion) | Not offered | Not offered to experts | Included — built-in template generator |
| Deposition prep against your transcript | Not offered | Not offered | Included — voice + paper modes |
| Conflict screening | You do it | Broker does it before referring | You do it (workspace-partitioned per-case) |
| Payment terms (when broker is involved) | You bill firm direct — your terms | Firm pays broker, broker pays you. Net-30 to net-60 typical industry pattern (not publicly published per-platform) | You bill firm direct — your terms (we are not in the payment chain) |
| Exclusivity | Non-exclusive | Generally non-exclusive (varies per platform) | Non-exclusive |
| Lead generation | Listing visibility only — you wait for inbound | Active outbound to firms — matched introductions | Listing visibility on /experts (inbound). We do not generate leads for you. |
If a broker's fee is tied to the engagement (search fee, finder's fee, or markup paid by the firm), the broker's margin is bigger when the engagement is bigger. They have no reason to want you to spend less time per case.
We charge a flat $49/mo regardless of how many cases you take or how much you bill on each. So we built the records-intake automation that compresses 8 hours of file-flipping into 40 minutes. Your time goes to medical opinion, your hourly stays the same, the case turns around faster — and you can take more cases without burning out. Aligned incentives.
SEAK, JurisPro, HG Experts — they charge you the same fee whether you get one inbound a year or fifty. So they have no reason to invest in conversion. They sell shelf space. (To be fair: this is also the honest, low-drama model. You pay, you get listed, no one is hustling. Some experts prefer that.) MedLegal AI is the same low-drama model on the directory side — free instead of $400/yr — with the addition that we make money when you actually use the workflow.
A typical expert doing three med-mal case reviews per month at $400/hr (low end of the physician rate band per our /expert-network page) and four hours per case. Two scenarios:
Direct dollar delta is small (you save $6/mo on subscription — not the point). The real delta is 22 hours/month back, which is either (a) capacity for ~5 more cases, or (b) clinical time, or (c) family time. The reason we built the workflow tool is that 22 hours is what the typical expert reports losing to records intake on a busy month, and 22 hours per month at your hourly rate is the actual economic question — not the $49 sticker.
Sourcing note on the math: the $400/hr lower bound is the floor of our published physician case-review band on /expert-network. The 8-hr-per-case manual records intake figure is the typical clinician-reported number for a ~2,000-page medical chart, not a published industry stat. Your actual time will vary by chart size, specialty, and how organized the producing party's discovery dump is. The 40-min AI-assist figure is the median observed turnaround on Pro plan usage to date.
Many experts will. The platforms are not mutually exclusive. The reasonable stack is:
Whatever's working — your existing attorney clients, a broker's outbound, a SEAK listing, LinkedIn, referrals from other experts. We don't compete here.
Bundle a free MedLegal AI /experts listing with whatever paid directory you're already on. More surface area, no cost.
This is the slot MedLegal AI was built for. Records intake, chronology, Daubert template, depo prep. The work that happens after the call.
No. Many experts use multiple platforms at once. We're the workflow tool on TOP of whatever lead source you use — directory, broker, or your own client list. We don't compete with your lead source. We compete with the time you spend per case once a case lands in your inbox.
Searchable directory at /experts filterable by specialty, state, jurisdiction, and credential set. SEO-indexed so your profile is also discoverable on Google. Inbound contact goes direct to your email — we don't gatekeep the introduction or charge per lead.
Keep them, drop them, or stack them. MedLegal AI is the workflow tool, not a lead source replacement. Many experts pay a directory $400–$700/year for marketing and use MedLegal AI for case execution. The two are additive, not substitutes. There is no exclusivity clause.
The $49–$499/mo workflow SaaS subscription. AI does the 2,000-page records intake so your time goes to medical opinion, not file-browsing. We are not a broker — there is no referral fee, no engagement cut, no markup added to your hourly. We make money when experts find the workflow tool worth $49/mo. If they don't, they cancel.
No catch. We're betting that clinicians who try the workflow on real cases will keep paying $49/mo because it compresses 8 hours of file-flipping into a defensible Bates-cited chronology in 40 minutes. If the workflow is not worth it on your cases, you cancel. We lose. You don't.
Yes — as a paid service to attorneys, not as a workflow tool experts use. Per their published pricing, individual services like Medical Chronologies use "custom pricing based on page count" and are sold to the law firm as part of the engagement. MedLegal AI ships the chronology tool to the expert directly as part of the $49/mo workflow. Different distribution model, same underlying capability.
Because the directory is not our business model. The workflow SaaS is. The directory exists to give experts a reason to sign up, because every expert who signs up is a candidate to try the $49/mo workflow tool. SEAK's business model is the directory itself, so they have to charge for it. Different model, different pricing logic. Their pricing isn't wrong — it's just a different product.
No. You can join the network listing only, free, no workflow subscription, no obligation. You can also subscribe to the workflow tool without being publicly listed on /experts if you prefer (some experts working primarily with one or two captive firms prefer this). The two are independent.
Honest answer: you shouldn't trust us blind. Try the free /experts listing (no cost, no risk) and read this comparison. If/when you want to try the workflow, there's a 14-day trial with no credit card required. Cancel anytime. The platform was built by a clinician for clinician case-review workflow — the design constraints came from real experience with how expert-witness case prep actually works.
Free listing on /experts. Searchable directory. SEO-indexed profile. No cut, no exclusivity, no contract term. The workflow tool is a separate decision you can make later (or never).
Join the network → Browse the directory