Retirement Succession Can Hedge Against Lateral Partner Acquisition Risks
While growing by acquiring lateral partners and practice groups can be lucrative, it carries many risks. Lateral candidates' projections of the revenue they will bring to a new firm can prove inaccurate, or a particular candidate may simply be a bad fit culturally.
April 15, 2024 at 12:20 PM
13 minute read
What You Need to Know
- Achieving even incremental upticks in gross income through lateral acquisition can translate into substantial increases in profitability.
- The stakes of not getting strategic growth right — which includes stemming predictable, preventable losses — are very high.
- The next generation of big producers, including lateral partners, is watching what law firm management does to improve succession.
Increasingly, law firms rely upon acquiring lateral partners and practice groups to grow revenue more quickly than they can by increasing output with existing talent. Larger firms understand that this is a good way to move up quickly on the Am Law 100 or 200 scale (which rank firms based on gross revenue) and increase average profits-per-partner (a key metric for attracting sought-after lateral candidates). Smaller firms also recognize the importance of lateral recruiting to making big jumps in profit over a short period of time. Regardless of where in the food chain a firm resides, achieving even incremental upticks in gross income through lateral acquisition can translate into substantial increases in profitability.
While growing by this means can be lucrative if done correctly, it carries many risks. Lateral candidates' projections of the revenue they will bring to a new firm can prove inaccurate, or a particular candidate may simply be a bad fit culturally — both common occurrences according to a 2023 report by recruiting analytics firm Decipher Investigative Intelligence. These risks are amplified by the enormous cost of acquiring a lateral partner, estimated by Thomson Reuters in a white paper called "The Changing Paradigm of Lateral Attorney Hiring" at "anywhere from $715,500 to $4 million in the first year."
This content has been archived.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 AllCozen O'Connor's Bernard Nash Pioneered the Modern State AGs Practice. Now He's Hanging Up His Boots
6 minute readCan a Law Firm Institutionalize Its Culture? Boies Schiller’s New Chairman Will Try
Longtime Reed Smith Health Care Partner Opts for Solo Practice Over Retirement
3 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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