How Justine models settlement and net-to-client.

Resolving a comp claim is a structuring problem: Compromise & Release versus Stipulations with Request for Award, and future medical left open or bought out. Justine models both paths on the same record, applies the ~15% judge-approved contingency fee and reasonable lien values, and reports net-to-client under each — so the attorney sees the trade-off between a clean C&R buyout and Stips that leave future medical open. Justine assembles the figures and the trade-offs; the attorney of record sets the demand and the bottom line.

What WC does.

1. 01

   C&R is modeled against Stips-with-open-medical on the same record, so the attorney sees what each structure costs and protects.

2. 02

   The ~15% judge-approved contingency fee and reasonable lien values are applied, and net-to-client is reported under each path — the figure the worker actually keeps, not a gross number.

3. 03

   Justine surfaces where leaving future medical open exposes the client to a WCMSA problem a clean buyout avoids.

4. 04

   Every projected figure traces to the records, rates, and statutory bases behind it, and settlement figures self-label as projections the attorney verifies.

5. 05

   Justine presents the structure as a modeled recommendation the attorney certifies before any offer is conveyed.

The AI reasons; the attorney decides.