From the Editor-in-Chief: A Rising Tide Lifts Most Boats
Demand and rate growth buoyed most Am Law 100 firms.
April 23, 2019 at 09:32 AM
4 minute read
"And you get a car, and you get a car and you get a car!"
As I went through the results of our Am Law 100 reporting, I couldn't help but think of a classic Oprah Winfrey giveaway special. Like her shows where guests would all receive extravagant gifts, nearly all of the nation's top-grossing firms took home big gains in top-line revenue and partner profits in 2018.
How does your firm's performance compare to peers & competitors? Get the Am Law 100 Data exclusively on Legal Compass.
But the Oprah analogy isn't quite fair, as it would suggest these firms didn't work exceptionally hard to earn those premiums. Only seven of the 100 largest firms saw their revenue decline in 2018. About 60 percent saw growth of 5 percent or more. Last year's financial results took some of the wind out of the argument that increased stratification among segments of the top 100 exists.
But there are clearly standouts, such as Kirkland & Ellis adding nearly $600 million in revenue in 2018, on top of adding almost the same the year before that. There are only a handful of firms that are pulling in such dramatic figures. In fact, if firms at all aim to move into a certain Am Law 100 tier (I'm not suggesting they should), many may be disappointed. Moving up in the rankings when everyone is having such a great year is difficult to do. Only 31 firms improved their ranking, and typically by only a slot or two. Those who saw big gains in rank did so via merger or close ties to the tech industry.
We saw California firms and those that represent major tech companies have a strong year, as did firms heavy in the M&A and private equity space (read Christine Simmons' piece on how Wachtell and Cravath capitalized on that momentum). Litigation and other countercyclical practices helped firms further down the Am Law 100. Rate increases helped just about everyone.
Within 2018′s stellar returns there is plenty of nuance. As my colleague Nicholas Bruch of ALM Intelligence told me, evidence of the stressors on demand, including alternative legal service providers, the Big Four, technology and client competition, are in the numbers. In the years leading up to the recession, year-over-year revenue growth was consistently in the 12 to 14 percent range. This year, 10 years after the recession, we are celebrating 8 percent as a watershed moment.
Dan Packel breaks down the story behind the numbers and how various market segments fared in our overview story. We also have a look at how a few firms were able to turn the Great Recession into a great opportunity. And in an interesting finding in the numbers over 10 years, we see how the top 50 have shrunk in every major U.S. market and grown in every major international market, creating significant implications for profitability. On top of that, we tally the toll that discounts and writedowns have taken on the Am Law 100′s top and bottom lines.
We offer a big congratulations to the Am Law 100 for a successful year. We will continue to cover and analyze the opportunities and challenges in the market, as well as what these numbers may look like when a recession inevitably hits. But as we note within this issue, firm leaders are feeling that if they can get one or two more strong years under their belts, they can weather any pending storm just fine.
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 AllAs Profits Rise, Law Firms Likely to Make More AI Investments in 2025
'So Many Firms' Have Yet to Announce Associate Bonuses, Underlining Big Law's Uneven Approach
5 minute readVersatility and 'Fearlessness' Drive Sullivan & Cromwell's Corporate Practice
5 minute readTrending 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