Hourglass

Hourglass is a web-based legal time-capture and billing-compliance system for firms whose clients enforce detailed outside-counsel rules. It is most suitable for litigation and insurance-defense practices that need evidence-backed deduction appeals as well as accurate entries. Its strongest case is a controlled workflow that combines capture, compliance checks and human sign-off.

Overview

Hourglass records attorneys’ activity across email, documents, calls and research, then drafts time entries with matter details, billing codes and AI-written narratives. Before prebill, it compares entries with each client’s outside-counsel guidelines to help catch deductions before submission. When time is deducted, it connects the deduction to the relevant entry, attaches evidence of the work and prepares an appeal draft for review and editing.

This goes beyond a basic timer or diary, making the product a better fit for firms where guideline compliance and recovery of challenged time are significant operational concerns. It is less suited to practices seeking a simple, self-serve logger without a broader review process.

Key features

Capture and drafted entries

Capture sources include Outlook, Word, Teams, Zoom, browsers and legal research tools. Drafts carry matter and billing-code context, which can reduce the reconstruction attorneys often do at the end of a day. Hourglass still requires the timekeeper to approve every entry before it reaches a bill, so it supports accuracy without removing professional responsibility.

Guideline controls

Firms can upload client guidelines as PDF, Word or email files. Hourglass extracts requirements into rules linked to their source paragraphs, giving billing staff a way to trace a warning to the underlying language. That is useful for clients with changing or highly specific policies, although the firm must establish and maintain those guideline inputs.

Deduction appeals

Linking a deduction to its time entry and work evidence creates a more organized appeal record than a separate email trail. Draft appeals can be edited before sending, preserving human judgment while reducing preparation work.

Integrations and deployment

Billing destinations include Elite 3E, Aderant, ProLaw, Litify, Clio and others. If a firm’s system is absent, Hourglass says it can build a custom integration in two weeks. Each customer receives a separate application deployment and database rather than sharing a firm database. Requests use TLS, stored data uses AES-256, and each firm has a readable audit record. The security page cites SOC 2 Type I and says a Type II commitment letter is available on request, alongside CCPA, GDPR and HIPAA topics.

Pricing

Hourglass uses paid, custom pricing; firms must request a price or book a demo. There are no published plan tiers, seat allowances, quotas or free-plan terms to compare, so budget approval depends on a sales discussion. That suits organizations needing a configured legal workflow but gives smaller practices no transparent self-serve entry point.

Platforms

Hourglass runs on the web. Firm deployments and customer data are hosted and processed in the United States. Core records follow the firm’s configured retention and enterprise agreement, while processing data and operational logs generally have rolling retention of no more than 30 days. Affected firms are notified within 72 hours of a security incident.

Who it's for

Hourglass is aimed at litigation and insurance-defense firms with substantial outside-counsel guideline exposure, multiple capture sources and recurring deduction work. Implementation typically takes about a month and begins with a small pilot group, so it fits firms prepared to manage a deliberate rollout. A solo lawyer or small practice wanting inexpensive manual time tracking is likely to find the deployment and approval model disproportionate.

Pros and cons

Pros

• Compliance before billing: guideline checks can identify problems before they become client deductions.
• Evidence-backed appeals: entries, work evidence and editable appeal drafts stay connected.
• Human control: every entry requires timekeeper approval, and Hourglass does not submit on anyone’s behalf.
• Separate customer environments: dedicated deployments and databases limit pooling of application data between firms.
• Broad workflow connectivity: listed capture and billing integrations cover common legal tools, with a stated two-week custom-integration option.

Cons

• Custom pricing: published costs and plan limits are unavailable, making comparison difficult.
• Web only: firms needing native mobile or desktop applications are not covered by the stated platform.
• US data processing: organizations requiring another hosting region may face a fit issue.
• Month-long typical rollout: it is not an immediate plug-and-play deployment.
• No expense tracking or billable-rate management: those tasks remain outside the product’s stated scope.

Alternatives

Choose TIMENTRY when iOS and web access, a 14-day free evaluation and no-cost trial entry matter more than Hourglass’s guideline and appeal workflow.

Bill4Time is the better choice for a freemium product with web, desktop and mobile platforms, including a Time & Billing plan at $49 a month billed monthly.

Pick PointOne for a paid service spanning iOS, macOS, web and Windows.

Billables AI suits firms seeking a paid extension, macOS, web and Windows option.

Choose iTimekeep if a free trial and Android, iOS, web and extension support are priorities; its price is provided by demo or trial request.

Laurel is an alternative paid platform covering Android, iOS, web, Windows and API access.

OneAdvanced Scribe is another paid, web-based option.

RTG Bills fits buyers wanting a free trial and a starting price of $15.95 a month for one user, with cost varying by user count.

See the broader Legal Time Tracking Software list for more options.

Verdict

Hourglass is a strong choice for litigation and insurance-defense firms that need guideline-aware entries and organized deduction appeals while keeping approval with each timekeeper. Its main reasons to look elsewhere are custom pricing, web-only access, United States data hosting and a typical month-long implementation. Firms comfortable with that controlled rollout should consider it; those seeking transparent, lightweight time tracking should compare alternatives first.