Jurorsearch

Est. 2020 United States Updated 2026-02-10

Jury selection management platform for litigation teams. Chicago-based, founded by Dan Johnson. Cloud-based platform for organizing voir dire: juror surveys, background research, oral responses, attorney notes, real-time team collaboration during jury selection. Also added mock trial management (Dec 2023, covered by LawNext/Bob Ambrogi). Pricing: from $999/month (GetApp), free tier available, unlimited users per subscription. Capterra/Software Advice: 5/5 (2 reviews). Listed on National Society for Legal Technology, ILTA LegalTechHub under Jury Selection. LawNext: described as ‘leading voir dire management solution.’ Targets trial attorneys, jury consultants, and litigation teams. Works best with 2+ collaborators per FAQ. 30 monthly branded searches. No Reddit mentions. Very niche but well-defined category — few purpose-built competitors in digital jury selection management.

Capabilities

Spans 1 product area: Jury Selection and Management.

Workflow Coverage

Based on published feature listings, this tool maps to 1 workflow area:

Research & Analysis

Workflow mappings derived from published feature lists. Not independently verified.

Company Info

Founded: 2020
Team size: 1-10 employees
HQ: United States
Sector: Litigation, Legal Research

What We Haven’t Verified

This page was assembled from publicly available information. Feature claims and workflow mappings are based on what the vendor and third-party listings publish — not hands-on testing or practitioner feedback.

Workflows

Based on practitioner evidence, Jurorsearch is used in these workflows:

Research & Analysis

What practitioners struggle with

Real frustrations from legal professionals — the problems Jurorsearch addresses (or should address). Sourced from practitioner reviews, Reddit threads, and case studies.

Litigation team preparing for trial needs to understand how a specific judge rules on summary judgment motions, Daubert challenges, and sentencing — but there's no systematic analytics on judge behavior, so strategy relies on anecdotes from colleagues who've appeared before that judge

Research & Analysis 18 vendors affected Mid-size firm (11–50) · Large firm (51–200) · In-house counsel · Legal ops

Defense team is preparing for trial in 3 weeks and needs to build a coherent timeline from fragmented evidence — witness statements contradict each other, body cam timestamps don't align, and critical connections between defendants are buried across thousands of documents

Research & Analysis 9 vendors affected Solo practitioner · Small firm (2–10) · Mid-size firm (11–50)

Insurance claim negotiations drag on for months because both sides posture — the adjuster lowballs, the plaintiff attorney inflates, and neither side reveals their true settlement threshold. Meanwhile the client waits, legal costs mount, and cases that could settle in days take 6-12 months of back-and-forth.

2 vendors affected

Where it fits in your workflow

Community Data

Loading practitioner-sourced data…