The platform was bought before the process was mapped
CaseCloud is licensed, then the firm discovers its practice areas do not fit the default matter structure. Redesigning a data model after users are live costs far more than designing it first.
Salesforce · Legal Matter Management
Mitratech CaseCloud implementation by a Salesforce-native team
Mitratech CaseCloud — the platform formerly sold as AdvoLogix — runs on Salesforce. That is why a CaseCloud rollout succeeds or fails on Salesforce architecture decisions made in week one: the data model, the security model, and where configuration should stop and code should start. Twopir Consulting implements both layers as one system.
Trusted by 500+ organizations — including law firms, corporate legal teams and legal technology companies building their operations on Salesforce with Twopir Consulting.
Built for Legal Operations
- Salesforce Partner
- Mitratech CaseCloud
- Formerly AdvoLogix
- Matter Management
- Data Migration
- Legal Billing
- Law Firms
- Corporate Legal
Why CaseCloud rollouts underdeliver
None of these are product faults. Every one of them is a decision made — or skipped — before configuration started. They are also all avoidable.
Salesforce and CaseCloud are treated as two separate projects
CaseCloud sits on the Salesforce platform, so its objects, sharing rules and automation share one namespace with everything else in the org. Configuring them in isolation produces permission conflicts and duplicated automation.
Legacy matters never fully arrive
Data comes across from a legacy system with open matters, ledgers and documents half mapped. Attorneys keep the old system open "just to check something", and the firm quietly runs two systems for a year.
Everything becomes a customization
Without a stated boundary between configuration and code, reasonable requests turn into Apex. The org gets harder to upgrade, and each Mitratech release becomes a regression-testing project.
Time and billing stay outside the system
Matters live in CaseCloud while time capture, invoicing and spend approval sit in spreadsheets or a separate finance tool. Nobody can answer what a matter has actually cost without a manual reconciliation.
Leadership still cannot see the portfolio
Reports exist, but they describe records rather than the business — no clean view of matter ageing, workload distribution, realization or spend against budget.
What Mitratech CaseCloud is, and who it is for
Mitratech CaseCloud is a legal matter and case management application built on the Salesforce platform, and sold as AdvoLogix until Mitratech rebranded it in November 2024. It brings matter records, documents, deadlines, time capture, billing and legal spend into one system, and it is distributed through the Salesforce AppExchange — so it inherits the platform's reporting, automation, permissions and integration surface rather than reimplementing them.
It is used by law firms, corporate legal departments and public-sector legal teams that have outgrown a practice-management tool but do not want to run their matter data separately from the rest of their client, finance and reporting stack. If the firm already runs Salesforce, CaseCloud extends it. If it does not, CaseCloud brings the platform with it — which is a bigger architectural decision than most vendors' evaluations make it sound.
Twopir Consulting does not build or resell CaseCloud. We are a Salesforce implementation partner that designs, configures, integrates and extends CaseCloud deployments for legal teams — and we are accountable for the Salesforce architecture underneath it, which is the part that determines whether the application still fits three years from now. Mitratech's own CaseCloud product documentation is the authority on what ships in the product; everything on this page is about the work of making it fit a specific firm. See also our CaseCloud and AdvoLogix overview and our wider Salesforce for law firms practice.
Implement, configure, or build on
Three different services, three different buyers, three different price points. Most proposals collapse them into "we work with CaseCloud", which is how firms end up paying implementation rates for configuration work.
| Service | What it means | When you need it | How it is delivered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implement | Stand the application up: licences, environments, the matter data model, security and sharing, core users, and the first practice areas live on real work. | The firm is moving onto CaseCloud from a legacy tool, or onto Salesforce for the first time. | Declarative platform setup plus data migration. No custom code in the critical path. |
| Configure | Tailor it to how this firm actually works: matter types, stages and deadline rules, intake forms, document templates, approval and billing workflow, dashboards and role-based views. | CaseCloud is live but generic — users work around it, and adoption has stalled. | Salesforce Flow, page layouts, record types, validation, reports. Still upgrade-safe. |
| Build on | Extend the application where configuration genuinely runs out: custom Lightning Web Components, Apex services, scheduled jobs, and API integrations to systems CaseCloud does not natively reach. | A firm-specific process or an external system has no declarative path — and the workaround is costing real hours. | Apex, LWC, Platform Events and REST integrations, written to survive Mitratech's releases. |
CaseCloud consulting and implementation, end to end
Every engagement starts with how the firm opens matters, does the work and gets paid. We design around that — never around a template.
CaseCloud readiness & solution design
Before licences are signed, we map practice areas, matter types and the intake-to-invoice flow, then state plainly whether CaseCloud, native Salesforce, or a combination is the right target architecture.
- Practice-area and matter-type modelling
- Fit assessment against native Salesforce
- Licence and environment planning
- Security, sharing and confidentiality design
- Phased delivery roadmap with decision points
Salesforce architecture underneath CaseCloud
The application inherits the org it lives in. We design the data model, automation order and permission structure so CaseCloud and everything else in the org coexist cleanly.
- Object and relationship design around matters
- Sharing rules, roles and record-level access
- Automation ownership and order of execution
- Sandbox strategy and release management
- Multi-office and multi-entity structures
Matter lifecycle configuration
We configure the lifecycle the firm actually runs — stages, deadlines, task orchestration and handoffs — instead of accepting a default that attorneys will route around.
- Matter types, stages and status logic
- Deadline, limitation and reminder rules
- Task orchestration and assignment
- Intake, conflicts and matter-open workflow
- Document templates and generation
Time, billing & legal spend
Time capture, rates, invoicing and spend approval configured against the firm's real billing arrangements, then connected to the finance system so the ledger is not a second source of truth.
- Timekeeper, rate and billing arrangement setup
- Invoice generation and approval workflow
- Legal spend and budget tracking
- Finance-system reconciliation
- Trust and client-funds handling where in scope
Data migration from legacy systems
Open matters, closed history, contacts, documents and ledgers moved with a mapped, validated, reversible plan — and a parallel run before anyone is asked to switch.
- Source profiling and field-level mapping
- Document and email migration
- Reconciliation and validation reporting
- Parallel run and cutover rehearsal
- Historical archive strategy
Adoption, enablement & handover
A system attorneys avoid is a failed project regardless of build quality. We train by role against real matters and hand over documentation the firm's own admin can use.
- Role-based training for fee earners and staff
- Administrator enablement and runbooks
- Hypercare through the first billing cycle
- Adoption measurement and follow-up fixes
- Documented configuration handover
From fit assessment to a system in daily use
Five phases, one accountable team. Phased deliberately: the first practice area goes live and starts returning value before the whole programme completes.
Discovery & fit assessment
We map the intake-to-invoice flow, the practice areas and the systems already in play, then confirm in writing what CaseCloud should own, what Salesforce should own, and what should stay where it is.
Architecture & solution design
Data model, security model, integration boundaries, migration approach and reporting structure — designed and signed off before configuration starts, because these are the decisions that are expensive to reverse.
Configure, integrate & migrate
We configure CaseCloud and the surrounding org, build the integrations, and run migration in rehearsed passes with reconciliation reporting after each one. Custom code only where the boundary we agreed says it belongs.
Test, train & go live
User acceptance testing against real matters, role-based training, then a controlled cutover with the legacy system read-only rather than switched off — so nothing is stranded mid-matter.
Hypercare & optimization
We stay through the first full billing cycle, fix what real use exposes, and hand over a documented system. From there firms either run it themselves or move onto a managed service — see CaseCloud support and managed services.
What CaseCloud connects to, and in which direction
A matter system that does not exchange data with documents, finance and identity becomes another silo. These are the connections that decide whether the firm runs on one record or several — covered in depth on our CaseCloud integration services page.
iManage · SharePoint · Google Drive
Matter records in CaseCloud stay authoritative while documents live in the firm's document management system. The matter ID and metadata flow to the DMS on matter open, and document links and versions flow back to the matter record — so attorneys stop keeping a parallel folder structure.
Finance & accounting systems
Approved invoices and time entries move from CaseCloud to the accounting ledger; payment status, credit notes and write-offs return to the matter. Finance reconciles against one record, and partners see realization without asking for a report.
DocuSign & e-signature
Engagement letters and matter documents are generated from CaseCloud data, sent for signature, and the executed copy plus its completion status writes back to the matter — which is what turns an intake record into an open matter without re-keying.
SSO & identity
Single sign-on through the firm's identity provider, with CaseCloud access governed by the same joiner-mover-leaver process as everything else. Matters carry real confidentiality requirements; access should not be managed by hand.
Salesforce CRM & business development
Clients, contacts and relationships stay on one platform, so business development sees matter history and matter teams see the relationship. This is the integration firms most often skip and most often regret.
AI and document intelligence
Where document volume justifies it, we connect extraction and summarisation services to the matter record. Mitratech ships its own CaseCloud Legal Assistant AI capabilities; we advise on where those fit against a firm's own data and security requirements.
What disciplined legal infrastructure delivers
These outcomes come from Salesforce legal-operations engagements delivered by the same team, on the same platform CaseCloud runs on. Each figure is scoped to the engagement it was measured in — follow the case study for the full context.
★★★★★
Twopir provided Salesforce customisation and integration services to help us build a robust, compliant, and scalable legal operations platform — connecting case management, document processing, and financial systems into one unified workflow. The result was transformative for how we run case-to-cash operations.
Operations Lead Fast-growing personal injury law firm Legal Operations
Personal Injury Firm — Multi-State
Streamlining case-to-cash operations with Salesforce, AWS and QuickBooks.
40%+ Faster case-to-settlement processing
45% Reduction in reconciliation effort
35% Improvement in data accuracy
Not a reseller. An architectural partner.
Firms rarely struggle because they chose the wrong application. They struggle because the architecture underneath it was never designed for how the firm actually works.
We are Salesforce architects, not just application installers
CaseCloud is a Salesforce application. Most of what determines whether it works — the data model, sharing, automation order, release safety — is Salesforce work. That is the work we have done for 12+ years across 250+ platform deployments.
We tell you where configuration should stop
We state the boundary between configuration and custom code at design time and hold to it. That is what keeps a deployment upgrade-safe when Mitratech ships a release, and it is the question almost no implementation proposal answers.
We have run legal operations, not just read about them
Intake, conflicts, matter open, deadlines, trust handling, realization — we have built these for personal injury, family law and corporate practices. The edge cases are already known to us.
We take over stalled implementations
A meaningful share of our legal work is rescue: an org someone else configured, a migration that stopped halfway, adoption that never happened. We audit first and tell you honestly what is salvageable.
We stay past go-live
Our standard is not a successful cutover. It is a system the firm still relies on after the second billing cycle, under more matters and more users than it launched with.
Answers before the first call
Yes. AdvoLogix was acquired by Mitratech and the matter management product was rebranded as Mitratech CaseCloud in November 2024. The AppExchange listings still carry the "formerly AdvoLogix" wording. If your firm bought AdvoLogix, you are running the product now called CaseCloud, and existing configuration, data and customizations carry forward — the rename did not require a reimplementation.
Yes. CaseCloud is built on and distributed through the Salesforce platform, so it runs inside a Salesforce org and requires the appropriate platform licensing alongside the CaseCloud subscription. Mitratech and Salesforce are the authority on current licence requirements and pricing. The practical consequence is that a CaseCloud decision is also a Salesforce platform decision, which is why we assess both together rather than treating the licence question as a procurement detail.
It depends on four things, and any firm quoting a duration before knowing them is guessing: how many practice areas and matter types you run, how much legacy data has to migrate and how clean it is, how many external systems have to integrate, and whether you are already on Salesforce. A single-practice firm with clean data and no migration is a fundamentally different project from a multi-office firm leaving a legacy system. We scope those four variables in discovery and phase delivery so the first practice area goes live and starts returning value before the whole programme is finished.
Configuration covers matter types, stages, deadline rules, page layouts, record types, validation, approval and billing workflow, document templates, reports and dashboards — everything achievable declaratively on the Salesforce platform, which stays upgrade-safe when Mitratech ships a release. Custom development means Apex, Lightning Web Components, Platform Events and API integrations, and it is justified when a firm-specific process or an external system has no declarative path. We state which side each requirement falls on during design, because that boundary determines your long-term maintenance cost.
Both are legitimate, and the honest answer depends on matter depth. CaseCloud is worth its licence cost when you need real legal matter structure — deadlines, document handling at volume, time capture, legal spend, and the surrounding legal workflow — because building and maintaining that natively is a long, expensive road. Building directly on Salesforce can be the better call when matter handling is comparatively light and the firm's real complexity sits in intake, referral or billing rather than in the matter itself. We give a recommendation with reasoning during the fit assessment, including the case for not buying.
Yes, and it is a substantial part of our legal work. We start with an audit of the existing org — data model, automation, permissions, migration state and adoption — and give you a written assessment of what to keep, what to rebuild and what to retire, with the trade-offs. We would rather tell you that half the configuration is sound than bill you to start again.
Less time than most firms fear, but the right time. We need a decision-maker who can settle process questions, one person per practice area who genuinely knows how the work runs, and an owner for data quality on the legacy side. Fee earners are involved at design validation and user acceptance testing rather than throughout. The commonest cause of delay is not technical — it is a process question nobody is empowered to answer.
Next Step
If CaseCloud is on your roadmap, the architecture conversation comes first
Twopir Consulting implements, configures and extends Mitratech CaseCloud on Salesforce — for growing and mid-market companies and enterprise legal teams that need matter, document and billing operations to hold under real caseload.
Speak with a team that understands Salesforce architecture & legal operations
