Lead Docket vs GrowPath: Consumer Intake CRM 2026

Start with the intake job, not the logo

A managing partner or intake manager who searched for a Lead Docket versus GrowPath comparison is close to a purchase. The job is concrete. A consumer calls, chats, or submits a form. Someone has to capture the facts, decide whether the matter is one the firm should keep, follow up if the caller goes quiet, and either open a file or make a clean referral. An intake CRM is the system that holds that inquiry, the qualification result, and the next action until the inquiry becomes a matter or a closed lead.

TL;DR: choose Lead Docket when the broken piece is the lead queue and a case system already holds the file. Choose Jove, the product formerly sold as GrowPath, when a personal-injury firm wants the inquiry, the matter, and the fee picture in one platform. Neither vendor's pricing page lists a dollar amount, so both subscriptions are Quote-based until a written quote arrives.

The category choice comes before either logo. One path is a dedicated intake layer that catches forms, calls, and chats, assigns tasks, and then pushes a signed matter into a case system. The other path keeps that chase and the case file together, which is how GrowPath was built and how Jove still describes its platform. Firms still widening the shortlist can read this guide to lead management software for law firms. The same pressure to answer a new inquiry before it goes cold shows up in other professional desks, including client intake for accounting firms, but the two products here are aimed at legal matters.

GrowPath is now Jove, and Lead Docket kept its name

GrowPath is not a second company sitting beside a different product. Rebrand announcement: January 21, 2026 according to PR Newswire (2026). The wire notice calls GrowPath a legal CRM for personal-injury firms and says the company is rebranding as Jove after more than two years of customer feedback and a rebuilt product foundation. It describes a shift from a single all-in-one tool toward a central system that lets a firm connect tools it chooses, including AI tools. The old website address now sends visitors to Jove. If a proposal, a review page, or an old order form still says GrowPath, ask the vendor to name the current package and to confirm you are buying Jove.

Lead Docket did not take a new name in that same move. Filevine's customer letter on its acquisition note says Filevine acquired Lead Docket and that Lead Docket continues as a stand-alone product for customers of any case management system. The letter also says a firm using another case system should still receive Lead Docket updates. The product site still presents intake forms, follow-up, marketing-source reporting, and payment links under the Lead Docket name. A comparison of Filevine's full case platform with Jove is a different buying question from the one this article answers.

Key Takeaways

• GrowPath rebranded as Jove on January 21, 2026. The current product is a personal-injury intake and case platform, and the old name on a contract should be translated into a current Jove package before anyone signs.

• Lead Docket remains its own intake product. Filevine owns it and says it still serves firms whose case file lives in another system.

• Both public price pages are Quote-based. Jove states that the first 6 subscription months are free aside from a fixed implementation fee, and that the price follows firm complexity rather than headcount.

• Lead Docket documents 5 predictive labels, and the help article limits that model to motor-vehicle leads. A Filevine webinar page describes mapping Lead Viability indicators to as many as 23 of the firm's own intake categories.

• Jove's Elite list includes firm-set lead scoring and Lead Chaser. The Essentials list includes intake management and OppAlerts, and it includes 5 firm reports. A demo of scoring is not proof that scoring is on every package.

• Pick Lead Docket to run a high-volume lead queue into a case system you already trust. Pick Jove to keep the personal-injury matter, the reminders, and the fee view together.

Who this is for

This comparison is for a managing partner or an intake manager at a consumer-facing firm, most often a personal-injury practice, who is close to signing and needs the product boundary in plain language. It is also for the operations lead who will have to explain to the desk why a score appeared, why a lead was referred, and which screen is the file of record after the retainer conversation.

Red flags: you require a public dollar price before any sales conversation, because neither pricing page lists one. You want a general-practice suite for work these vendors do not describe on the pages reviewed here. You need a published prediction on every case type, because Lead Docket's documented model is motor-vehicle only and Jove places lead scoring on the Elite list rather than on the Essentials list.

How we evaluated these tools

Seven decisions carry the weight in a partner meeting about intake software. The weights below sum to 100. They are a reading order for public pages, not a score awarded to either vendor and not a ranking from a lab. A higher weight means this guide refused to call the product a fit until a page the vendor controls answered that question. Price clarity is on the list because a quote-only page changes who should stay on the shortlist. It is not a claim that a hidden price is automatically a bad contract.

The method used only pages opened for this article: each vendor's pricing and product pages, Lead Docket's help articles, Filevine's own posts, a January 2026 wire announcement, and a 2020 trade-press report on GrowPath's scoring patent. No one ran a scripted intake in either product for this guide. Where a page did not state a feature, the matrix says so. Third-party sites that guess a monthly price were not used, because those figures are not on the vendor pricing pages.

What the public record shows side by side

Read the rows as documented product boundaries. The words in the cells come from vendor pages and help articles, not from a private demo.

The practical split is the queue versus the full matter. Lead Docket's public pages stay with the lead through capture, tasks, source reporting, and a payment link, then hand the record to a case system. Jove's platform page starts at the first call and describes caseloads, reminders, documents, settlements, and marketing ROI in one place. A firm that already trusts its case system and is losing people in the first two days is reading the Lead Docket column. A firm that wants to stop retyping the intake into a separate file is reading the Jove column.

Once a lead is actually signed, the engagement letter and the later contract work are a different problem from the intake screen. That handoff is covered in what autonomous contract management means for law firms. Neither product page reviewed here replaces a lawyer's review of the fee agreement.

Pricing checked against the vendor pages

Pricing checked October 10, 2026.

Lead Docket's pricing page offers a custom quote. It does not list a plan price, a per-user price, or a setup fee. The subscription in this guide is therefore Quote-based. The LeadsAI help article calls summarization and predictive analysis a paid feature and tells the firm to ask a Filevine representative about that price and about custom prompts. That add-on is also Quote-based, because no dollar figure for it appears on the pricing page.

Jove's pricing page also publishes no dollar amount. Free subscription months: 6 according to Jove (2026). The page says the firm is charged for implementation during that period, not for per-user fees, and it calls implementation a single fixed fee. It says pricing is based on firm complexity rather than headcount. Essentials reports included: 5 according to Jove (2026). Those five reports sit on the Essentials list beside Intake Management, OppAlerts, matter trackers, smart reminders, document tools, SMS, statute calendars, and an automated damages calculator. The Elite list adds Lead Scoring, Lead Chaser, email marketing, Referral Transparency, QuickBooks, productivity tracking, and named connections such as Eve, Supio, Delivra, and Lexamica.

A ten-person desk and a forty-person firm cannot be costed from these pages. Jove says it does not bill by headcount, and Lead Docket does not publish a formula at all. Ask each vendor for four lines in writing: the implementation fee, the subscription after any free months, what changes if you add an office, and whether the score you saw in a demo requires LeadsAI or the Elite list. Until those lines exist, a monthly total would be a guess, and this guide will not print one. Six free subscription months are not a free project.

Lead Docket, for firms that live in the lead queue

Best fit is a consumer firm whose intake staff live in a queue of web forms, calls, and chats, and whose case file already has a home. The features page describes custom intake scripts, automated messages, recurring tasks, marketing spend entered so the firm can see revenue by source, and payment links for retainers, consultation fees, and referral fees, including card and ACH. It also describes referral follow-up that checks in with referral partners. That is a lead-to-signed-client product with money and source reporting attached, not a full settlement ledger.

Direct case-system links: 6 according to Lead Docket (2022). The help article names Filevine, PracticePanther, Needles, CASEpeer, Trialworks, and Clio. The same article says webhooks can push Lead Docket events to other applications, with a status change given as the example, and that the product also has an API for systems that are not on the direct list. A Clio firm can still be a Lead Docket candidate. So can a Filevine firm that wants the intake queue kept in its own screen until the matter is ready to move.

MVA prediction labels: 5 according to Lead Docket (2025). After an intake is created for a motor-vehicle case type, the documented labels are highly likely, likely, unknown, unlikely, and highly unlikely. The article says the tag can change as data is added. Summaries are a separate LeadsAI piece. They cover the lead, the messages, and the notes. The firm can refresh a lead summary whenever the record is saved, only when someone clicks generate, or once at creation and then on demand. Message and notes summaries update when someone clicks generate. None of that is described as a substitute for a lawyer deciding whether to accept the case.

Lead Viability case-type cap: 23 according to Filevine (2026). That webinar page says LOIS Lead Viability can map up to 23 case types onto the firm's own intake categories and return positive and negative indicators per case type. Ask which of those indicators are in the product you would get on day one. A webinar description and the motor-vehicle model in the help center are not the same sentence. Treat the help-center limit as the one you can train on until a representative shows the wider map in your own case types.

Limitations follow from those pages. There is no public price. The documented prediction does not claim to cover family law, employment, or mass tort as such. The product does not pretend to be the whole case file after signup. Payment links collect money the firm requests. They do not, on the pages reviewed, replace the case system's settlement accounting. LeadsAI is paid, and the amount is not on the pricing page. A firm with a handful of inquiries a week may be renting a queue it does not need.

Implementation is a sales conversation plus an admin project. Someone must turn on webhook rules if an outside system will hear about status changes, and someone must keep the authentication key private. Map the statuses that mean signed, referred, and rejected before any message leaves the firm. If Filevine is the destination, confirm which status creates the project and which custom fields travel with the lead. If Clio, CASEpeer, or Needles is the destination, push one signed test lead and read the matter that appears before you train the desk. Primary pages for this profile are the pricing page, the features page, the LeadsAI article, the integrations overview, and the Filevine webinar page.

Jove, for firms that want the matter in the same system

Best fit is a personal-injury firm that wants the call, a firm-set score, the matter, the reminders, and a fee view together, and that can buy from a quote. The platform page describes a core with suites for intake, case management, documents, reviews and referrals, analytics, productivity, and financial clarity. It says questionnaires can be nested so staff do not skip a required question, that lead scores flag the cases the firm wants to sign, and that caseloads can be viewed by person or department with problems marked in red. Financial clarity on that page includes marketing ROI by channel and location, settlement and fund tracking, and a forecast. Calendar connections for Outlook and Google appear on the Essentials pricing list. QuickBooks appears on the Elite list, so a native accounting connection should be confirmed as an Elite line and not assumed on every quote.

The Smart Intake page, opened for this article, is more specific about the phone call. It says a case type can be routed to a named attorney, that staff are prompted from criteria the firm sets, and that Lead Chaser sends text, email, and reminder sequences that can be split by case type, stage, or value. OppAlerts, which the pricing page places on Essentials, prompt extra questions when a keyword is typed. The example on the Smart Intake page is mesothelioma. That is a prompt to ask more, not the same feature as the Elite lead score. Referral Transparency is an Elite line, while Google review mapping is an Essentials line. A marketing sentence about referrals is not, by itself, a promise that every package includes the Elite referral report.

The scoring idea is older than the Jove name. GrowPath launched in 2017, and the scoring tool described in May 2020 was the company's 18th patent, U.S. Patent 10,656,794, awarded on May 19, 2020. Scoring patent in sequence: 18th according to LawSites (2020). That report says the score updates from answers the intake specialist enters, using variables the firm defines, and that a separate buzzword prompt can push the specialist to ask about a related mass-tort fact. Current Jove pages still describe a firm-set score and keyword prompts. The patent's age does not prove the screen is unchanged. It does mean a buyer should ask which parts of that older score now sit only on Elite.

Limitations are the quote, the package split, and the practice focus. No dollar price is published. A firm that needs the score and the automated chase should not accept an Essentials-only description of those features. The pages reviewed aim at personal injury. A consumer practice outside that focus should ask for a written answer before it treats Jove as a general CRM. The first 6 months without subscription fees still leave the implementation fee. A hub that invites outside tools also means the firm still has to decide who maintains those connections.

Implementation, on the pricing page, is a fixed project covering onboarding, configuration, and guidance, with support meant to make the product part of daily work. Ask for a written list of Elite items on the quote, for who edits OppAlerts when the docket changes, and for who owns the score rules after go-live. The public GrowPath External API V2.0 collection still shows a matter create that requires the firm's own case type and status ids. Whoever implements has to store those ids. They are not the same number in every firm. Primary pages for this profile are the pricing page, the platform page, the Smart Intake page, the January 21, 2026 announcement, and the 2020 LawSites report.

Monday math for a consumer intake desk

Take an illustrative Monday, built so the arithmetic can be checked, not a measured firm and not a vendor benchmark. The desk logs 80 new inquiries. Twenty-five are motor-vehicle calls. Assume 12 minutes of questions on each of those calls: 25 times 12 equals 300 minutes, which is 5 hours, before anyone updates the case file. The firm's own keep-rule holds 8 of those 25 for attorney review, and 8 divided by 25 equals 32 percent. The other 17 are referred or closed. The remaining 55 inquiries, at an assumed 8 minutes each, add 55 times 8, or 440 minutes. Adding 300 and 440 produces 740 minutes, which is 12 hours and 20 minutes. Dividing 740 by 80 produces a blended 9.25 minutes per inquiry. Filing a kept matter through the public GrowPath External API V2.0 collection means the create call carries case_type_id, case_status_id, and case_date_of_incident after the person record exists. Those field names are real. The sample numbers in that collection are not your firm's ids, and the 12-minute and 8-minute assumptions are desk math, not a published timing study.

The last two rows sit inside the 25 motor-vehicle calls. They are not added again on top of the 740 minutes. The 96 minutes and the 204 minutes are the same 300 minutes, split by the keep-rule. What the software changes, if it changes anything, is how much of that interview has to be typed a second time and how fast a missed caller is queued. This guide does not assign a saved-hour number to either product.

A proposed layer above the system you pick

A firm that already has Lead Docket or Jove often still has a gap between "the status changed" and "a person meant to send this." A proposed US Tech Automations workflow starts when Lead Docket emits a webhook because a lead status changed. The prerequisites are an admin-created webhook rule, the firm's webhook authentication key, and a written list of which statuses mean signed, referred, or rejected. The action is to read that payload, drop any status the firm has not approved, and open a review item that names the lead, the case type, and the task that would go next. The output is that review item plus a log of when the payload arrived. A person still decides whether a retainer link or a referral note goes out. This is a configurable design. It is not a live deployment, and it is not a measured result.

On the Jove side, the same proposed design can follow the matter-create pattern in the GrowPath API collection that the current company still publishes. The prerequisites are a bearer token, the firm's real case-type ids, and permission to receive a create or a scheduled export. US Tech Automations would draft a follow-up only after the matter record exists, then stop so a person can approve the text before any message is sent. The output is an approved draft or a rejected draft, not an automatic client text. If the token or the id map is missing, the workflow does not start. Teams that want the vocabulary for how an outside agent should address a system of record can read what the agent client protocol changes. The protocol article is context for the design. It is not a claim that either legal product ships that protocol today.

Building the same path in Zapier, Make, or n8n

The honest alternative for many desks is not another legal suite. It is a connector. Lead Docket's own integrations article says webhooks are typically used with a third-party service such as Zapier. Make and n8n can sit in that same role when someone configures them. Those tools can keep a run history, retry a failed call, branch on an error, and store evidence of what fired, if the firm builds that. The buyer then owns observability, idempotency, escalation, access control, and maintenance. Idempotency matters here: a retried webhook must not open a second matter for the same caller. Escalation matters when a payment link fails or a referral partner never gets the file. Access control matters because an intake payload contains injury facts and phone numbers.

A proposed US Tech Automations design could keep one status map, one rule that skips a lead id it has already processed, and one human approval step before a referral email or a retainer request. The prerequisites are the same webhook key or API token, a field map the firm maintains, and a named reviewer for exceptions. The difference is not magic. It is that the retry rule, the duplicate check, and the approval stop are configured as one path instead of left as three separate scenarios inside a connector account that only one specialist understands. If that specialist leaves, the connector path still has to be documented. If the firm will not name a reviewer, neither path should send client messages.

When NOT to use US Tech Automations: a one-office team that already finishes intake inside Lead Docket's tasks or inside Jove's own sequences does not gain a clearer file by adding a second log. A firm that cannot get an admin to issue a webhook key or an API token cannot start the design at all. A desk that only needs a reminder inside the product it already pays for will spend less attention staying there than teaching a connector, or an outside workflow, the meaning of every status.

Mistakes that waste a shortlist

• Treating GrowPath as a current, separate product. The January 21, 2026 announcement says the name is now Jove. An old screenshot of a lead score is a clue, not a current package list.

• Assuming the five motor-vehicle labels apply to every case type. The help article names MVA case type leads. Ask, in writing, what a trucking, premises, or mass-tort lead shows on day one.

• Buying from an Elite demo and signing an Essentials description. OppAlerts and intake management are on the Essentials list. Lead Scoring and Lead Chaser are on the Elite list.

• Dropping the implementation fee because six subscription months are described as free. The pricing page still charges for implementation.

• Letting a status change text a consumer with no reviewer. Both products can automate messages. Someone at the firm still owns the script and the stop rule.

• Putting a third-party website's dollar guess into the budget. If the number is not on the vendor pricing page, it is not the price in this guide.

Terms an intake manager will hear on the call

• Intake CRM: the system that holds a new inquiry and the next action before, and sometimes after, it becomes a matter.

• Lead: the person and the possible case, still in qualification, not yet the firm's filed matter.

• Matter: the case file itself. In the GrowPath API collection, creating an intake is creating a matter with a case type and a status.

• Lead score: a firm-defined value that tells staff to sign, route, or keep asking. On Jove's pricing page it is an Elite item.

• OppAlert: a keyword prompt, listed on Jove's Essentials list, that tells staff to ask a further question.

• Quote-based: no dollar amount on the vendor's public pricing page, so the contract price is whatever the written quote says.

• Webhook: a message one system sends when something happens, such as a lead status change, so another system can react.

• Referral fee: money owed to or expected from another firm. Lead Docket's features page says it can track and chase those fees. Jove lists Referral Transparency on Elite.

Questions firms ask before they request a quote

Did GrowPath shut down?

No. GrowPath rebranded as Jove on January 21, 2026, and the old site now points at Jove. Ask any reseller to put the Jove package name on the quote so you are not buying a label that the vendor has already retired.

Is Lead Docket only for firms that use Filevine?

No. Filevine's acquisition letter says Lead Docket stays available as a stand-alone product, and the help center lists other case systems, including Clio, CASEpeer, Needles, PracticePanther, and Trialworks. A Filevine firm can still use it. A non-Filevine firm should test the specific handoff it needs.

Do these pages show a monthly price?

No. Lead Docket and Jove are both Quote-based on the pricing pages opened for this article. Jove adds a structure, not a dollar figure: six subscription months free aside from a fixed implementation fee, with price tied to firm complexity rather than headcount.

How many prediction labels does Lead Docket document for motor-vehicle leads?

Five. The help article lists highly likely, likely, unknown, unlikely, and highly unlikely, and it limits that model to MVA case type leads. A wider Lead Viability map of up to 23 categories is described on a Filevine webinar page and should be confirmed against your own case types.

Does every Jove package include lead scoring?

No. The pricing page places Lead Scoring and Lead Chaser on the Elite list. The Essentials list includes Intake Management and OppAlerts, which are useful, and they are not the same line item as the score. If the demo centered on a score, the quote has to say Elite or it has to say the score is included.

Should a firm buy both products?

Not as a default. Lead Docket is the intake layer that can hand a signed lead to a case system. Jove keeps personal-injury intake and the matter in one platform. Running both makes sense only when a channel you cannot move lands in one system and the file of record lives in the other, and only after someone writes the field map. This guide did not find a native Lead Docket-to-Jove connection on the pages it opened.

Can Zapier, Make, or n8n replace either product?

No. Those tools can move a field, retry a failure, and keep a run log when you configure them. They do not supply the intake script, the motor-vehicle labels, the firm-set score, or the matter file. Use them, or a configured outside workflow, only for the gap after the system of record has already stored the lead, and only with a person approving anything a client will see.

Before you request either quote, see how US Tech Automations configures this as a proposed path with a webhook or an API token, a duplicate check, and a human stop. Bring the status list and the case-type ids to that conversation. The vendor quote still decides the software price.