A worked example
One consumer. The whole list. Her choice.
The consumer below is a hypothetical. What she does is not: she opens the directory, sees every attorney who clears the bar in a random order, and narrows the list herself with a few plain filters. tortl ranks no one at any point. Watch where the choosing actually happens.
The consumer
A clean rear-ender outside Reno.
She was just hurt, she is on her phone, and she has never hired a lawyer before. She knows a handful of things about what she needs. That is enough — because she does the narrowing, not us.
- Consumer
- 32-year-old driver, rear-ended on I-15 outside Reno
- State
- Nevada
- Case type
- auto injury
- Prefers
- an attorney who speaks Spanish
- Location
- within 25 miles of Reno
- Availability
- can only meet in the evening
The narrowing
Every filter is her hand, not ours.
She starts with everyone who qualifies and applies one filter at a time. Each filter is a neutral, verifiable fact. tortl narrows; it never weights one attribute over another, and it never reorders what remains.
- Everyone who clears the bar 14 shown
Every attorney licensed and active in Nevada, practicing auto injury, and accepting clients. Shown in a random order that rotates daily. No ranking, identical presentation.
- + Speaks Spanish 6 shown
She filters on language — an attorney-attested fact, labeled as such. tortl narrows the list; it does not decide that language matters. She did.
- + Within 25 miles of Reno 4 shown
She adds a distance filter. Four of the six remain. The order is still random among them.
- + Evening consultations 2 shown
She adds availability. Two attorneys clear all four of her filters. Both are shown identically — she chooses between them, or looks at both.
Three filters took her from fourteen attorneys to two. She could have stopped at any step, changed her mind, or removed a filter. The list is hers to shape.
Who remains
Two attorneys, shown identically.
Both cleared the bar and all four of her filters. Neither is ranked above the other. Neither paid to be here. She reads both and picks — or contacts both. That is the whole of it.
If nothing had matched
Empty would have meant empty.
Say she had also required a woman attorney, and none of the two spoke Spanish, worked evenings, sat within 25 miles, and were women. tortl would not have quietly dropped one of her filters to fill the screen. It would have said so plainly — "no attorney matches all five; three match if you drop the distance filter" — and let her decide which requirement to relax. Choosing which of her criteria to discard is hers alone. If nothing matched at any distance, tortl would point her to the Nevada bar's referral service.
Where the choosing happens
tortl verified, showed everyone, and held the order steady and random. Every narrowing decision was the consumer's. That is the entire design.
Ready to be one of the two
Lock in the founding rate before consumer access opens.
Free until launch