Are DC Law Firms Missing the Legal Industry's Revenue Revival?
Recent reports from Wells Fargo and Citigroup suggest law firms nationwide had their best year in a decade, but firms in the capital are struggling to keep up.
February 12, 2019 at 05:40 PM
4 minute read
Mid-Atlantic law firms trailed their U.S. counterparts in 2018 as measured by revenue and net income growth, according to a review by Wells Fargo's law firm lending and advisory unit.
Wells Fargo found revenues growing just 0.82 percent year-over-year at the Mid-Atlantic firms it surveyed—comprising 13 firms in the D.C. and Baltimore region—with net income down approximately 1 percent. Anonymized data from the 150 firms in Wells Fargo's nationwide survey showed average revenue growth close to 6 percent and net income growth of 7.6 percent, the best figures since the Great Recession.
“The Mid-Atlantic region underperformed in 2018 compared to the other regions and the overall averages,” said Joseph Mendola, senior director of sales with Wells Fargo Private Bank's Legal Specialty Group.
Mendola said revenue growth was lowest in the Mid-Atlantic of all nine regions it surveyed, which also include Northern California and the Pacific Northwest, Southern California, Florida, the Midwest, the Northeast, Pennsylvania and Delaware, and Texas.
Demand dropped 2.7 percent in the Mid-Atlantic, as measured by billable hours, compared to a 2.3 percent increase for all 150 firms, which represents a 5-percentage-point swing between the national average and the D.C.-area participants. (A report from Thomson Reuters on Tuesday said the legal marketplace saw its largest growth in demand nationwide last year at any point since 2011.)
Despite the less than stellar results for D.C. and the Mid-Atlantic, Wells Fargo recorded partner profits ticking up just over 2 percent across the region, which the bank attributed to declining partner head count.
Mendola said he thought the better-performing firms have reaped benefits from transactional practices that aren't necessarily associated with D.C. firms, namely M&A, private equity, and public debt practices. Changes in the regulatory regime in Washington and the nature of IP work may have also played a role in the “softer” results, Mendola said.
“I think one of the things I'd keep in mind, these are percentage changes from prior year to this year, and when I look at the specific firms there were a number of cases where some firms had extraordinary years in 2017,” Mendola said. “It could've been some extraordinary event, a contingency fee coming in, working on some particular matters that were unusual, a big litigation or something like that. And therefore if they normalize in 2018, for the purposes of our report, it would have been down.”
Overall, large law firms are posting some of their best financial results in recent years. Revenue growth in 2018 as recorded by Citi Private Bank's Law Firm Group was better than any time in more than 10 years, with revenues climbing 6.4 percent at the 191 firms Citi studied.
Consequently, Mid-Atlantic firms look optimistic about the coming year. Mendola said the region projected revenues of approximately 4.1 percent. That could be overly optimistic, however. Mendola said the same Mid-Atlantic region projected “somewhat better results” for 2018 than they ended up reporting.
There have been other signs that 2018 was ending with a whimper for firms in D.C. A flash survey of the third quarter by Citi Private Bank Law Firm Group reported revenue growth in D.C. trailing the rest of the country, which Citi attributed to less activity in the region.
The inventory level in the Mid-Atlantic is a concern as well. While other regions have begun 2019 with a buildup in inventory, which is often collected in the first quarter, Mendola said Mid-Atlantic firms reported inventory down 0.7 percent at the end of 2018 as compared with 2017. As a result, Mendola said firms are “probably not going to get out of the gate very quickly in terms of financial results” in 2019.
READ MORE:
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 AllManhattan Prosecutors Say They Will Oppose Efforts by Trump Legal Team to Dismiss Case
Trump's SEC Likely to Halt 'Off-Channel' Texting Probe That's Led to Billions in Fines
Apple Asks Judge to 'Follow the Majority Practice' in Dismissing Patent Dispute Over Night Vision Technology
Trending Stories
- 1Read the Document: 'Google Must Divest Chrome': DOJ Proposes Remedies in Search Monopoly Case
- 2Voir Dire Voyeur: I Find Out What Kind of Juror I’d Be
- 3When It Comes to Local Law 97 Compliance, You’ve Gotta Have (Good) Faith
- 4Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Virginia Griffith, Director of Business Development at OutsideGC
- 5Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Bill Tanenbaum, Partner & Chair, AI & Data Law Practice Group at Moses Singer
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