See the exposure timeline before you offer a free consultation
Each Roundup enquiry captures the lymphoma diagnosis date, exposure duration, and whether the person personally mixed or sprayed the product, plus diagnosis records and exposure documentation — so your team only advances claims worth a consultation.
The exact intake your roundup litigation leads complete
This is the real 7-question guided intake for Roundup Litigation — the same flow your customers finish before you ever pick up the phone.
What a qualified roundup litigation lead should tell you
Screens Roundup/glyphosate exposure claims for the diagnosis, timing, and exposure history that determine whether a lymphoma case fits the current litigation window.
- Exposed Roundup Or Glyphosate
- Diagnosed With Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma
- Lymphoma Diagnosis Occur In
- Identify When Roundup Or
- Personally Mix, Spray, Or
- Roundup Or Glyphosate Exposure
The questions your team needs answered
Every roundup litigation intake asks these — and why each one matters.
| Question | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| Were you exposed to Roundup or glyphosate before your lymphoma diagnosis? | Confirmed exposure to Roundup or glyphosate is the foundational causation link, so a no answer sharply lowers the claim's viability. |
| Were you diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma or another lymphoma? | A confirmed lymphoma diagnosis is the medical criterion the entire litigation theory depends on. |
| Did your lymphoma diagnosis occur in 2000 or later? | Diagnosis timing relative to 2000 helps place the claim within the relevant litigation window rather than outside it. |
| Were you exposed to Roundup or glyphosate for at least one year before diagnosis? | At least a year of exposure before diagnosis strengthens the causation argument compared to brief or incidental contact. |
| Can you identify when your Roundup or glyphosate exposure occurred? | Being able to identify when exposure occurred makes it easier to build a documented exposure timeline for the claim. |
| Did you personally mix, spray, or apply Roundup or other glyphosate products? | Personally mixing or spraying the product indicates direct, higher-intensity exposure compared to secondhand or ambient contact. |
| Did your Roundup or glyphosate exposure happen while working, farming, or using it on your own property? | Occupational or property-based exposure context helps distinguish sustained, work-related exposure from casual or one-off contact. |
How Cliont scores roundup litigation leads
Every answer is weighted automatically — no manual review required.
Value signals
- Exposed Roundup Or Glyphosate: yes
- Diagnosed With Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma: yes
- Lymphoma Diagnosis Occur In: yes
- Identify When Roundup Or: yes
- Personally Mix, Spray, Or: yes
- Roundup Or Glyphosate Exposure: yes
See the lead your team receives
Roundup Litigation Lead
From first click to qualified lead
Follow people and businesses seeking counsel through one smooth, guided flow.
They land & meet you
Your video greeting plays instantly — a real face instead of a blank form.
They explain the matter
Smart questions adapt to their matter and capture the full scope.
They share the documents
The facts, dates, and any paperwork come attached, so you can assess the matter before the consultation.
You get a ready lead
Scored and qualified — waiting for you to win it.
Built for roundup litigation workflows
| Cliont capability | Roundup Litigation application |
|---|---|
| Weighted scoring | Diagnosis confirmation, exposure duration, and personal application each carry distinct weights, so a farmworker with a decade of exposure scores higher than someone with a brief, unconfirmed exposure. |
| Conditional branching | If a prospective client answers no to Roundup or glyphosate exposure, the intake can skip deeper exposure-context questions rather than pushing them through the full sequence. |
| Document upload capture | The intake collects diagnosis records and exposure documentation before the case ever reaches an attorney's calendar. |
| CRM routing | Only leads that clear the diagnosis, exposure duration, and timing thresholds route into your CRM as qualified claims, instead of every inbound enquiry landing in the same queue. |
Common roundup litigation lead scenarios
Long-term applicator on own land
A farmer or landscaper who personally mixed and sprayed Roundup for years before an NHL diagnosis after 2000 scores highest, since exposure duration, personal application, and diagnosis timing all align.
Diagnosis predates 2000
A lymphoma diagnosis before 2000 falls outside the typical litigation window and scores lower, letting the firm route it as a follow-up rather than a booked consultation.
Exposure timing unclear
A claimant who can't identify when their Roundup exposure occurred is harder to substantiate for causation, so the intake flags this gap instead of scoring it as strong as a documented timeline.
Occasional homeowner use
Someone who used Roundup occasionally on a home lawn, rather than working or farming with it long-term, generates a distinct answer mix on duration and context than an occupational applicator.
Connect Cliont to your workflow
Send leads
HubSpot, HighLevel, Salesforce, JobNimbus
Book matters
Google Calendar, Outlook Calendar, Calendly
Notify your team
Email, SMS, Slack
Automate follow-up
Zapier, Webhooks, API
Simple, transparent pricing
Choose the plan that works for your business.
Professional
Unlimited intake forms and leads for your growing business.
- Unlimited intake forms
- Custom video greetings
- AI-powered voice bot
- English + Spanish support
- Automatic lead scoring
- Digital estimates & e-signatures
- Photo, video & file upload
- Advanced analytics dashboard
Pay Per Lead
Only pay when you receive a qualified lead.
- Unlimited intake forms
- Custom video greetings
- AI-powered voice bot
- English + Spanish support
- Automatic lead scoring
- Digital estimates & e-signatures
- Photo, video & file upload
- Charged only for submitted leads
More mass torts intake templates
Roundup Litigation lead-intake FAQs
How does the intake weigh when the lymphoma diagnosis happened?
The intake asks whether diagnosis occurred in 2000 or later, since this timing question carries meaningful weight in the scoring and helps flag cases that fall outside the typical litigation window before a consultation is booked.
What if the prospective client didn't personally spray or mix Roundup?
The catalog asks separately whether the person personally applied the product and whether exposure happened while working, farming, or using it on their own property, so indirect exposure claims are scored differently than direct applicator claims.
Does the intake require proof of how long someone was exposed?
Yes, exposure duration of at least one year and whether the person can identify when exposure occurred are both catalog questions that feed the score, since longer, well-documented exposure supports a stronger claim.
What lymphoma diagnoses does this intake screen for?
The intake asks specifically about non-Hodgkin lymphoma or another lymphoma diagnosis, which is the core medical criterion tied to Roundup and glyphosate litigation claims.
What happens to a lead that can't pinpoint when exposure occurred?
That answer carries lower weight than a confirmed exposure timeline, so the lead still reaches your CRM but scores lower, giving your team the context to decide whether it warrants a consultation.
What documents does the intake collect from prospective clients?
It's built to collect diagnosis records and exposure documentation upfront, so your intake staff aren't chasing pathology reports or employment history after the initial conversation.
Turn roundup litigation visitors into qualified cases
Give every roundup litigation visitor a guided intake instead of a dead contact form — and get a scored, qualified lead before you book a consultation.