# Marcus Delgado, Managing Partner at Delgado & Crane — read of Law Firm AI, June 10 2026

> 16 years doing plaintiff-side PI and employment, running a 14-attorney shop in Phoenix. Currently trying to get off Clio Grow without blowing up our intake coordinator's entire workflow.

## How I got here

Searched "AI law firm intake software reviews 2026" because our intake coordinator quit last month and I'm staring at a backlog. Saw a generic LinkedIn ad, ignored it. Then found this in the third page of results after clicking through three SaaS products that turned out to be the same rebranded chatbot. Clicked because the headline was specific: "Solo lawyers, stop losing prospects to the night shift." We're not solo but that 9pm call problem is real enough that I kept reading.

## What I clicked first

The stat block. Specifically "47 hours/week saved" and "$220K ARR increase." I always click those first because they tell me how honest a company is willing to be about how they got the number. Spoiler: they don't say. "On average" and "Case median" with no n, no firm size, no practice area. Could be one firm. Could be three. I have no idea.

## Where I paused

The honest disclosure at the bottom. Specifically: "we don't have live customers on this idea yet. We shipped the strategy package; you ship the customer conversations." I had to read that twice. So the $220K ARR increase, the 47 hours saved, the 3.2x intake volume -- all of that is projection, not reported data. And they're selling me a $5 dossier and a $99 "adopt the build" package. This is not a SaaS product. This is a Wishdeal Studio idea kit. I genuinely did not understand that until I was most of the way down the page.

## What I distrusted

"Zero false negatives." On conflict checks. That sentence is in the FAQ and it's the kind of claim that would get a lawyer disbarred if it were in a contract. Our malpractice carrier asks about our conflict process every renewal. No software in existence has zero false negatives on conflict detection. The moment I read that I started discounting everything else on the page.

Also: the SOC 2 Type II cert claim on a product that by their own admission has no live customers. SOC 2 audits typically require operational evidence from a real production environment. I'd want to see the actual report number before I put client data anywhere near this.

The pricing is also confusing. $299/mo to use the product, or $5 to read the dossier, or $99 to get the code, or "custom" to hire the studio? These are four different products sold on one page and I still don't know which one I'm being asked to buy.

## What would convince me

One actual case study with a named firm, their practice area, and a specific before/after on conflict check time -- not "47 hours." Something like "Martinez Immigration in Austin, 6 attorneys, went from 3 paralegals spending Tuesday morning on conflicts to one person doing a 20-minute review." That's a story I can verify and relate to. I don't need the $220K number if I can talk to the actual firm.

On the security side: the actual SOC 2 report, or at least the audit period and auditor name. Not a badge on a landing page.

## What I'd ask in an email reply

1. The honest disclosure says you have no live customers. What's the conflict check claim based on -- a demo environment, a test dataset, or something else? Who actually produced that number?

2. For the $299/month plan -- is that a live product I can log into today, or am I buying early access to something still being built?

3. My intake coordinator used to do a soft-conflict check by calling our referring attorneys. The AI says it flags "family ties, past employment" -- how does it know those relationships exist if they're not in our matter database?

## Verdict: on-the-fence

The underlying problem is real and the page communicates the features clearly enough. But the honest disclosure buried at the bottom reframes everything above it -- those stats are projections for an idea, not reported results from a product. I'd reply to one email if they led with that context up front instead of hiding it below the pricing table.

---
*Memo by skeptic persona, generated 2026-06-10. Studio breaks own self-grading loop.*