AI tools can be appealing because they produce an instant range. Typically, you enter details like:
- date of injury
- body part and diagnosis
- treatment history
- missed work or restrictions
- wage information
Then the tool suggests a possible settlement range based on patterns it has seen.
The problem is that Texas cases often turn on specifics that generalized tools can’t reliably capture—such as how your treating doctor documented work limits, whether you reached maximum medical improvement (MMI), and how the insurer frames disputed issues.
In Bay City, we also see a common practical obstacle: workers sometimes return to work in a limited capacity before the paperwork and restrictions fully match what their job actually requires. That mismatch can affect how the insurer calculates wage loss and how strongly your file supports future impairment.


