Gavelytics Partners with CourtCall, Expanding Judicial Analytics to New States, Markets
Remote court appearance provider CourtCall will offer a 'simplified version' of Gavelytics judicial analysis as it expands to Florida, Texas and California.
October 18, 2018 at 09:00 AM
4 minute read
The rise of litigation analytics is extending to law firms of all sizes. An expansion to smaller firms is behind state and local judicial analytics provider Gavelytics teaming up with remote court appearance provider CourtCall to offer the latter's customers a “simplified version” of its platform ahead of court appearances. The move represents an expansion of litigation analytics to smaller law firms.
Through the partnership, CourtCall customers that rely on the service for remote appearances will be given the option to also purchase analytics exploring the rulings, preferences, biographical information and other facts about the judge they will be appearing in front of. This offering does not require subscribing to Gavelytics' larger enterprise service, and is expected to cost a couple hundred dollars per use.
The partnership coincides with a national expansion for Gavelytics, which to this point has been focused on California courts. The service will be provided to most California and some Florida customers starting in December 2018, with the expectation of rolling out to Illinois and Texas customers by the middle of next year.
For Rick Merrill, CEO and founder of Gavelytics, pairing with a remote court appearance provider was a natural fit. He told Legaltech News, “You can imagine how much sense it would make that if you're going to call into a hearing with Judge Zach, wouldn't it be cool to be offered information on Judge Zach at the same time?”
He said that unlike the current version of Gavelytics, which is primarily sold on a firm-wide basis, the CourtCall version will be “a simplified version of our product.” This means that the purchase will be limited to one judge's analytics, and feature most, though not all, of Gavelytics' features. Merrill added, “You can think of it as the difference between the Basic tier and the Pro or Enterprise tier, like a lot of software products.”
Of course, it also doesn't hurt for Gavelytics, founded in 2015, to break into new markets with a preexisting provider that many law firms of all sizes use on a daily basis. “That's going to put us in front of literally thousands of lawyers per day in those states. This is a really high-volume deal,” Merrill said.
From the CourtCall perspective, offering Gavelytics is a value-add for customers to use the service. “We are excited about the opportunity that this partnership affords us to help our users gain new perspective on trial court judges and utilize technology to develop customized litigation strategies,” said Bob Alvarado, CEO of CourtCall, in a press release announcing the partnership. “Through our national reach, the Gavelytics platform will give litigators, in California and beyond, statistical insights on significant judicial trends and behavior. This is a huge added value for anyone using CourtCall's one-of-a-kind technology.”
And with these sorts of partnerships, judicial analytics continues to grow. There has certainly been a renewed interest for it in the space—both Thomson Reuters and LexisNexis highlighted its federal court analytics capabilities in major product releases over the summer. For his part, Merrill said Gavelytics' expansion to other state courts outside of California and the partnership with CourtCall is an important next step.
He explained, “This is the sort of thing that just about every lawyer should be able to get.” And while Gavelytics may eventually see some of these solo report buyers become enterprise customers, in the end, he said, “we wouldn't be at all bothered if some of the smaller firms out there buy just the reports through CourtCall.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250