Niche Practices Make Midsize Firms Must-Haves for Clients
From counseling craft breweries to conducting complex investigations, these midsize firms aim to compete by doing what no one else does.
October 25, 2018 at 01:49 PM
6 minute read
Editor's Note: This story is adapted from ALM's Mid-Market Report. For more business of law coverage exclusively geared toward midsize firms, sign up for a free trial subscription to ALM's new weekly newsletter, The Mid-Market Report.
Eugene Pak was handling intellectual property and transactional work at DLA Piper eight or nine years ago when he found his niche. While representing a Northern California brewery in a dispute, he quickly grew fond of the craft beer industry—the beer itself was pretty good, too—so when his client suggested he focus more attention on the burgeoning market, he hopped in.
For Pak, shifting to a newly specialized practice meant finding a new firm, one that offered the right platform for someone catering to startup and small breweries with major needs and minimal funds. He followed a friend to 65-lawyer, Oakland, California-based Wendel Rosen Black & Dean, a firm with billing rates that suited his new clients, as well as attorneys who could help them with all their legal needs—IP, corporate, real estate or anything else.
“It was a little bit of a struggle to say I'm going to focus on this one industry and put most of my eggs in one basket,” Pak said, “but I found that that is what you have to do to stand out.”
And in many cases, a midsize firm is the best place to do that. For attorneys and firms, niche practices offer a way to differentiate from the competition and bring in business at the same time.
In the late 1980s, 203-lawyer Greenspoon Marder got in on the ground floor of a new industry and carved out what can only be described as a niche: a timeshare and resort practice. At the time, there were hardly any regulations governing timeshares, according to Rebecca Bratter, the firm's deputy managing partner, and Greenspoon Marder's attorneys helped to create the laws.
As the industry grew, so did the firm. Its clients needed advice on land use, real estate, creating corporate structures, labor and employment and, as can be expected in any growing market, litigation.
“This was a brand new practice and Greenspoon Marder really helped that industry grow, and the industry helped the firm grow,” Bratter said. “Our entire regulatory practice grew out of the timeshare industry.”
Practices like the firm's timeshare work—or its separate focuses on entertainment, alcohol and beverage, and now cannabis—can help a midsize firm survive and grow, Bratter said. They've played an “integral role” as a complement to the firm's bread-and-butter corporate work. In many cases, as Greenspoon Marder found with its timeshare work, a sturdy niche can be a reliable client's gateway into a firm.
“Once you've proven through your niche practice that you can compete—that your lawyers are as good, if not better than any others—now you can bring them in to the rest of your firm,” Bratter said. “And then [clients see] the rates are more competitive, there's less bureaucracy, we're more nimble.”
As Pak pointed out, smaller firms or solo practitioners can't offer clients the same kind of “one-stop shop,” so midsize firms sit in a pocket that can help niche practices flourish.
Rob Reedy, the managing partner of Porter Hedges, said niche practices offer a clear path for midsize firms to better compete with their peers. His firm's energy practice has a particular strength in operational oil and gas and midstream work, in addition to the usual transactional work that gets most of the attention. Many of the firm's clients, he said, turn to Porter Hedges for things like gas contracts, participation agreements and joint ventures.
“These deals are nuts and bolts,” he said. “They don't end up being splashy.”
But the true value of many companies lies within such work, making it a profitable niche for the firm.
Building up a niche practice takes careful planning, though, to ensure it can deliver a return on investment.
“Something that's a specialized niche today is a commodity tomorrow,” Michael Kim of 92-lawyer Kobre & Kim said. “Nothing stands still. Some firms say they have a niche or specialized practice, but at one point patent prosecution was specialized, and now they're a commodity; at one point white-collar crime was specialized and now it's a commodity.”
Kim's firm developed what he called “a niche within a niche,” serving as conflict counsel on complex, international litigation and investigations—work that nearly no other firm can do because it typically requires the size and resources of a large, full-service firm, but those firms need to refer it out because of their reliance on repeat clients. Kim said his firm handles “way over half” of the matters that fall into its niche.
For firms seeking to target a niche, he said, it's important that there be a barrier of entry. If other firms are able to rush in and begin doing the work, it can quickly become a commodity, negating the benefits of focusing on the work in the first place. He said Kobre & Kim also maintains a culture of constant change to avoid getting caught in a not-quite-niche. As examples of the risk of inertia, he pointed to airline regulation boutiques in the 1970s that went out of business upon deregulation, and intellectual property boutiques in the 1990s that were eventually forced to merge with bigger firms.
Operating a truly successful niche practice takes a level of self-assessment, he said.
“If you have a practice that you think is niche, but it's being priced at or below prevailing market prices for generic legal services in that area, you really don't have a niche practice,” he said. “You have a narrow practice.”
Done right, though, a niche practice can make all the difference.
“If a midsize firm has a niche practice that is premium priced—the clients are willing to pay a premium for them—that firm can focus on those core specialties, and if they're disciplined can propel themselves to a higher level,” Kim said. “It can lift the firm overall in the client's eyes.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllThe Law Firm Disrupted: With KPMG's Proposed Entry, Arizona's Liberalized Legal Market is Getting Interesting
Big Company Insiders See Tech-Related Disputes Teed Up for 2025
Trending Stories
- 1The Coordinate Jurisdiction Rule on Insurance Bad Faith Litigation
- 2South Carolina Physicians Challenge Abortion Ban Under Religious Freedom Claims
- 3Special Series Part 5: The State’s Bond Lock Impermissibly Delegates Legislative Authority
- 4President-Elect Donald Trump Sentenced to Unconditional Discharge
- 5JCPenney Customer's Slip-and-Fall From Bodily Substance Suit Best Left for a Jury to Decide, Judge Rules
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250