States We Serve
Personal injury trust accounting, wherever your firm is based.
We work with personal injury law firms across the United States.
The trust accounting discipline is uniform; the compliance layer built around it is not. This page summarizes how we account for that difference.
All 50 states, plus Washington D.C. Hover a marker for the state abbreviation.
Core Discipline - Constant in Every Jurisdiction
Regardless of state, every engagement is built on the same fiduciary fundamentals:
- Client and third-party funds held in a segregated trust or IOLTA account, separate from firm operating funds
- A matter-level client ledger for every case, with a running balance
- Monthly three-way reconciliation - bank statement, check register, and client ledgers tied out against each other
- No disbursement issued against uncleared or provisional funds
- No trust checks issued to "cash"; every disbursement identifies a specific payee and purpose
This is the operating standard we apply on every engagement, before any state-specific layer is added.
The Same Requirement, Executed Differently by State
This is really one point, not several: every state imposes its own version of the same underlying obligations, and we track that variation deliberately rather than assuming one state's version applies everywhere. In practice, that single fact shows up across nearly every part of the compliance layer:
Record retention - the same underlying duty to preserve trust records after a matter closes is set to a different number of years, generally somewhere between five and seven, by each state's own rule, with the retention clock starting at termination of representation rather than at the date a record was created.
Verification of compliance - the same underlying obligation to demonstrate compliance to the Bar is enforced through different mechanisms by state: annual self-certification in some, formal account registration on an annual or biennial cycle in others, and in at least one state, random independent CPA-led compliance reviews layered on top of self-certification. Some states require no proactive filing at all beyond producing records on request.
IOLTA administration - the same underlying pooled-trust-account structure is run by a different administering body depending on the state: directly by the state bar in some, by a separate nonprofit bar foundation in others, and by a court-affiliated fund elsewhere - each requiring its own tax ID on the account and, in some cases, its own interest-rate methodology for what the bank pays on pooled funds.
Distribution timing - the same underlying duty to pay out undisputed settlement funds promptly is defined differently by state: a fixed day-count presumption in some, a "prompt distribution" standard with no attached number in others, which shifts the determination from a bright line to a facts-and-circumstances judgment.
Contingency fee structure - the same underlying duty to charge a reasonable, disclosed fee is implemented differently by state: a statutory sliding-scale percentage cap tied to recovery size and litigation stage in some, a general reasonableness standard paired with a mandatory written closing statement in others, with medical malpractice recoveries sometimes carrying a separate, tighter cap layered on top.
The pattern is consistent even where the specifics aren't: the obligation is the same: safeguard the money, document it, report it accurately, and every state answers "how" differently. Our process is built around tracking that "how" state by state, rather than treating any one state's answer as the default.
Our Process
Research before onboarding. We research a state's current trust accounting requirements as part of onboarding a firm based there, before its books are treated as review-ready.
One process, adapted documentation. Check writing, reconciliation, and ledger maintenance follow the same discipline in every engagement. The reporting format is what we adapt to match a given state's requirements.
Ongoing review, not a one-time lookup. State bar rules change - retention periods get extended, certification programs get introduced, audit approaches get revised. We check our approach against each state's current requirements on an ongoing basis.
New-state onboarding is state-specific. Taking on a firm in a state we haven't worked in before triggers dedicated research into that state's requirements as part of onboarding.
Why This Matters
"Review-ready" is not a single national standard - it's defined separately by each state Bar. A retention period, a verification approach, or a lien-priority assumption carried over from the wrong jurisdiction is a common way a well-run trust account still generates findings in a Bar audit. The underlying accounting discipline doesn't change from state to state; the documentation is built to match what your specific state Bar expects to see.
An important note. We are not a law firm and do not provide legal advice. Our work is limited to backend accounting support - check writing, reconciliation, and bookkeeping - prepared in line with our understanding of your state's trust accounting reporting standards. We'd always encourage your firm's own attorneys or outside counsel to confirm compliance requirements specific to your state and your firm's circumstances.
Have a Specific State You Want to Confirm?
If you'd like to talk through what our process looks like for your specific state before getting started, we're glad to walk through it directly.
Get in Touch →