The outcomes ledger
Most legal-tech sites show star ratings they wrote themselves. This page works differently: every entry is either a verifiable public court record (anonymized where publishing a docket link would identify the defendant) or an outcome a real user reported and explicitly agreed to share — and each entry says which. Everything passes a manual review. Names are withheld; courts and case types are kept general to protect privacy. A defendant’s result depends on their facts, their court, and their deadline — nothing here is a prediction or a guarantee of your outcome.
Entry #1 · Public court record
The case that started Answered. Founder John DiSalle was sued by a debt buyer in Eau Claire County, Wisconsin, answered pro se, and the case was dismissed. This one is not anonymous — it is a public record you can check yourself: Wisconsin circuit court case 2025SC000885.
Read the full case study →Entry #2 · Public court record, anonymized
A Wisconsin consumer sued by Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC used Answered to prepare a self-help response. Public court records later showed the case was dismissed without prejudice. Answered verified the outcome against the public docket; the docket link is withheld here because publishing it would identify the defendant.
This is not a testimonial quote, not legal advice, and not a promise that another case will end the same way. Answered did not represent the user, file for the user, or control the court outcome. Dismissed without prejudice means the plaintiff may be able to refile.
More consented outcomes are in review. As users report results and approve sharing, they appear here — honestly, and only with consent.
What you will never see here: purchased reviews, incentivized testimonials, or aggregate star ratings computed from numbers we made up. Every entry here clears a higher bar than a star rating: a verifiable public court record, or a real user’s outcome shared with explicit written consent — each one individually reviewed. We show only outcomes you can check rather than hundreds you cannot verify.
Yes. Every entry rests on one of two bases, and each entry says which: a public court record (Entry #1 — the founder’s own dismissed case, Plaza Services, LLC v. DiSalle, verifiable on the Wisconsin court system as case 2025SC000885; and Entry #2, an anonymized docket-verified dismissal whose link is withheld to protect the defendant), or a user’s self-reported outcome published only with explicit consent after a manual review.
Answered is self-help legal software operated by ellaSiD LLC, built by a founder whose own debt-buyer lawsuit was dismissed — a verifiable public court record. It is not a law firm, publishes no purchased reviews or invented star ratings, and promises no outcome. If you can afford a lawyer, hire one.
Because the bar is high, not because results are hidden: an entry must be either a verifiable public court record or a user-reported outcome with explicit sharing consent, and every entry passes manual review. The product is young. Answered does not buy reviews, invent star ratings, or compute aggregate scores to make the ledger look longer than it is.
Check your answer deadline free. No card, no account required to start.
Check my deadline freeAnswered is self-help software, not a law firm, and no outcome is guaranteed. Outcomes above are self-reported by users, shared with consent, and reviewed before publication; they are not a promise about any other case.