CasePeer to Clio
Firms move from CasePeer to Clio when they are broadening past injury work or need billing and integrations. We map cases onto Clio matters and custom field sets, keep your cost and settlement history usable, and set up billing and trust with your bookkeeper.
The growth story here is practice diversification. A firm that adds employment, family, business or estate work quickly needs hourly billing, trust accounting and flexible matter types, none of which is what CasePeer is for. Clio handles general practice properly and can hold your injury matters adequately, which makes it a natural consolidation point.
Integrations are the second reason. CasePeer has a focused integration set, and firms that want a specific phone system, document assembly tool, accounting connection or marketing platform often find Clio already supports it. If you are also building automation, the Clio API and its presence in Zapier make that much simpler.
The loss is injury-specific structure. Providers and treatment records, negotiation tracking and lien management all become custom fields, notes or attachments in Clio, and repeating data cannot be held as rows. For a firm still doing volume injury work that is a downgrade. For a firm where injury is now one practice area among several, it is usually the right trade.
CasePeer
A cloud personal injury case management system with an opinionated workflow that most PI firms can adopt quickly.
- Purpose-built PI workflow out of the box
- Treatment and provider tracking included
- Negotiation, settlement and lien tracking
- Clean interface that staff adopt quickly
- Useful standard reporting with little setup
- Far less configurable than Filevine
- Limited hourly billing and trust accounting
- Not aimed at general practice matters
- Fewer integrations than Clio
Clio
The broadest general practice management platform in legal, covering matters, billing, trust accounting and a large integration marketplace.
- Largest integration marketplace in legal software
- Mature billing and trust accounting
- Clio Grow for intake and CRM
- Well documented open API
- Deep training, support and consultant network
- Less phase-driven than PI-specific systems
- No native medical records or treatment module
- Matter custom fields are flat rather than sectioned
- Heavy plaintiff reporting usually needs add-ons
What moves, and where it lands
How CasePeer records map to Clio. Every row is reviewed with your team before anything is imported.
| CasePeer | Clio | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Cases | →Matters | Create a Clio practice area and custom field set per CasePeer case type. |
| Clients and Contacts | →Contacts and Companies | Provider and insurer contacts need a naming convention to stay findable. |
| Providers and Treatments | →Summary fields plus attached exports | Clio holds one value per field, so treatment history becomes a filed export. |
| Negotiations and Settlements | →Custom fields plus notes | Keep final numbers as fields and the offer sequence as a note. |
| Costs | →Activities (expense type) | Map CasePeer cost types onto Clio expense categories to preserve reporting. |
| Documents | →Documents | Map CasePeer categories onto a standard Clio folder template before loading. |
| Case Notes | →Matter Notes | Preserve author and date; leave automated entries out of the load. |
| Tasks and Calendar | →Tasks and Calendar Entries | Open items and future dates, with statute dates verified individually. |
| CasePeer intake | →Clio Grow Leads | Carry lead sources across so marketing attribution survives the move. |
What to watch for
- Treatment data is the structural loss. CasePeer holds providers and visits as rows and Clio cannot, so decide which summary values you need as custom fields, such as total medical billed and treatment status, and file the full history as an exported PDF on the matter.
- Do not lose your cost discipline. CasePeer cost types drive settlement math, and if they collapse into generic Clio expenses you lose both the reporting and the ability to reconstruct a disbursement. Map each cost type to a distinct Clio expense category during the load.
- Clio trust accounting is better than what you are leaving, but it has to be set up properly. Client funds accounts, reconciliation and your bank feed all need your bookkeeper, so treat it as a workstream rather than a checkbox on the plan.
- Statute and deadline handling gets less automatic. CasePeer is opinionated about injury deadlines and Clio is not, so either add a court rules integration from the marketplace or put a manual docketing routine in place before go live.
- Lien tracking has no Clio home. If you handle a meaningful volume of liens, plan for custom fields plus a task process, or a maintained spreadsheet with a named owner. This is the gap firms notice first after the move.
- Your injury reporting resets. Clio reporting is strong on billing and productivity and weak on plaintiff metrics, so identify the two or three injury reports you genuinely use and design custom fields to answer them, or accept the loss deliberately.
Five to ten weeks is typical. Most of the time goes on deciding how injury data is represented in Clio, mapping costs correctly, and document volume. Billing and trust setup runs alongside and depends on your bookkeeper's availability, which is worth confirming before you fix a go live date.
Questions about this move
Is Clio a step down for injury work?
Can we bill hourly properly after the move?
What do we do about liens?
Will our injury cases in progress survive the move?
Move from CasePeer to Clio.
Tell us how many matters, users, and documents are involved. We will come back with a plan, a field map, and a realistic timeline.