Artificial intelligence isn’t a distant concept for personal injury law anymore—it’s here, it’s active, and it’s shaping the way claims are evaluated, negotiated, and settled.
In the past two years, insurers have quietly integrated AI into nearly every stage of their claims process. On the other side, plaintiff attorneys are experimenting with AI tools for research, evidence organization, and client communication.
The result? A race to see who can use the technology more effectively—and ethically.
But the question remains: Is AI a friend or a foe to injured plaintiffs?
Whether you realize it or not, AI is already influencing outcomes in ways that aren’t always visible to clients—or even attorneys.
On the insurance side, AI tools are being used to:
On the plaintiff side, law firms are using AI for:
In short, AI is touching nearly every part of a personal injury case—and it’s doing it at unprecedented speed.
When used responsibly, AI can be a genuine ally.
These advantages can level the playing field—if attorneys control how the AI is used and ensure it serves their client’s best interests.
The flip side is that AI can also introduce risks, especially when the other side controls the technology.
When these risks combine, plaintiffs may face stronger pressure to settle early—and for less.
The goals of insurer AI and plaintiff AI couldn’t be more different:
The imbalance is clear: insurers can afford to deploy vast, data-driven systems at scale. Plaintiffs often rely on smaller teams with fewer resources. Without a strategy to close that gap, attorney advocacy can be undermined before negotiations even begin.
When an insurer’s AI flags a case as “low resistance” due to the plaintiff’s financial stress, it can trigger a quick lowball offer. For a client struggling to pay rent or keep up with medical bills, that offer can be tempting—even if it’s far below the claim’s true value.
This is where pre-settlement funding changes the game.
By providing plaintiffs with the financial stability to cover essentials, funding removes the urgency to accept the first offer and gives attorneys the time to counter AI-driven undervaluations with a fully developed case.
At Golden Pear, we’ve seen firsthand how a well-timed funding advance allows attorneys to push for the settlement their client truly deserves—without the ticking clock of financial hardship.
We view AI as a tool, not a decision-maker. In our own operations, AI helps us process funding requests quickly and efficiently—but every approval still goes through experienced human review.
Our commitment is simple: technology should enhance fairness and speed without replacing the judgment, strategy, and empathy that personal injury law demands.
AI is here to stay in personal injury law. The question isn’t whether it’s good or bad—it’s how you position yourself and your clients to benefit from it.
When insurers control the AI narrative, plaintiffs can be pushed into settlements that don’t reflect the true cost of their injuries. When attorneys and funding partners work together to balance that equation, AI can be transformed from a silent adversary into a powerful ally.
At Golden Pear, we help level the playing field—so technology works for your clients, not against them.