Buoyed by Steady Demand, Law Firms Expected to Keep Growing in 2019
From IP law to Brexit, surging demand will keep revenues steady in the coming year.
December 27, 2018 at 03:15 PM
4 minute read
For U.S. law firms, 2018 stands as one of the strongest years in recent memory, with 5.5 percent revenue growth in the first half and equal or greater growth expected for the second half when all is said and done, according to Citi Private Bank Law Firm Group.
Some will assume that the industry's marquee names are the beneficiaries of the remarkable results, and there is some truth to that, as the surge is concentrated within the Am Law 100. But firms in the tiers below have also enjoyed noticeable growth, in some cases outpacing the results claimed by the industry's leaders.
Gary Wingens, managing partner of Lowenstein Sandler, an Am Law 200 firm, reported 51.4 percent revenue growth at his firm over the past decade, as well as 38.5 percent growth in revenue per lawyer, more than twice the rate experienced by the top 50 firms. Lowenstein also reported a strong revenue-to-head-count growth ratio—51 percent to 9.3 percent—compared with the Am Law 50's average ratio of 47 percent to 37 percent.
“The hedge fund industry is attracted to good value, and it's not just about price, it's a value proposition that they're after—the whole package of what we're able to provide,” Lowenstein partner Ben Kozinn says.
Even so, the largest and most prestigious white-shoe law firms know what they're doing and are raking in profits like never before.
“2017 was a record year for us, and 2018 is on track to be a much better year than 2017,” David Chapin, managing partner of Ropes & Gray, says.
In Chapin's view, law firms' impressive profitability is not solely a function of the steep rates they are charging. Chapin sees a number of macro factors having a direct impact on Big Law and on firms' revenues in 2018 and well beyond. For example, ongoing concerns throughout much of the world about Brexit have inspired law firms to launch and build entire practice areas devoted to related issues.
Although President Donald Trump may have spoken during his candidacy about ushering in a more business-friendly regime in Washington, D.C., the reality is that there is still more than enough work for lawyers in numerous industries and sectors. In the pharma and life sciences sectors, the government's heightened scrutiny of both pricing and product labeling has driven numerous manufacturers and distributors to seek out expert counsel.
Despite the “regulation lite” rhetoric, Chapin sees deals involving foreign investment into the U.S. as having grown trickier as Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S. enforcement has expanded. Tariffs, anti-money-laundering efforts and international sanctions have increased in volume and complexity under the current administration. Outflows of capital from China to the U.S. have slowed, Chapin notes, a fact partly attributable to CFIUS and partly to currency controls put in place within China. “This makes getting through the process a little more cumbersome and trickier, and clients tend to gravitate to Ropes & Gray and our peer firms for those sorts of issues,” he says.
“Looking at the overall numbers, you've seen a growth in demand for the Am Law 50, which means increase in demand for lawyers to help solve these complicated problems,” Chapin adds.
Strong capital markets combined with historically low interest rates have encouraged institutional investors to put capital to work and to reap returns by exiting investments they made in past years, Chapin says.
“In certain respects, the regulation-lite mantra of the Trump administration has probably reduced some of the concerns, but in other areas, depending on the nature of your investors, the regulatory environment is as complex as it was or even more uncertain,” Chapin says. “And that is fertile ground for lawyers.”
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
© 2024 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 All'Further Investment in Power' Will Drive Big Law Business—But What About Clean Energy Projects?
6 minute readLegal Departments Gripe About Outside Counsel but Rarely Talk to Them
4 minute readAs Profits Rise, Law Firms Likely to Make More AI Investments in 2025
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
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