Pa. Firms See Demand Growth as Expenses Drag on Profits
A survey found that compensation was the biggest driver of rising expenses among Pennsylvania law firms, which enjoyed higher-than-average demand growth in the last quarter.
November 16, 2018 at 03:55 PM
3 minute read
Demand and revenue at Pennsylvania law firms are on the ups, but it's being outpaced by above-average expense growth, a new survey says.
In its legal industry flash survey for the first nine months of 2018, Citi Private Bank found revenue growth of 5.6 percent among the 12 Pennsylvania law firms surveyed, just slightly below the national revenue growth of 6.3 percent. However, when it came to demand, Pennsylvania firms saw a 3.6 percent increase, higher than the 2.5 percent growth nationally, according to David Altuna and Lisa Kohut of Citi.
But along with above-average demand growth, Pennsylvania firms also saw above-average expense growth of 6.8 percent, compared with 5.9 percent nationally.
“On average, Pennsylvania is seeing margin compression,” Altuna said.
That is largely due to increased compensation expenses among those firms, Kohut said. Pennsylvania firms saw 10 percent growth in compensation expenses, versus 7.5 percent growth nationally. Among all the regions where Citi surveys, Pennsylvania had the second-highest growth in compensation, Kohut said.
That may be due in part to increased leverage. At the same time, Pennsylvania firms saw lawyer head count increase by 2.3 percent, while equity partner head count was down 1.2 percent.
The wave of associate salary increases that hit this summer would have been fully reflected in this survey only for those firms that were among the first movers, Altuna noted. So firms that waited to implement raises until later may cause additional growth in compensation expenses.
While some Pennsylvania-born firms that maintain a large presence here, like Dechert and Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, moved to increase associate salaries over the summer, others said they wouldn't be considering the issue until later in the year.
Aside from compensation, other expenses among Pennsylvania firms were closer to average. Overhead expenses were up 4.4 percent, compared to 4.7 percent nationally.
Pennsylvania firms saw rates increase by 3 percent, and revenue per lawyer grow by 3.3 percent. Productivity was up 1.3 percent.
“From a top-line perspective, we're bullish overall in terms of how the industry is going to turn out and Pennsylvania is fitting into that profile,” Altuna said. “But we're concerned about where profit growth is going to turn out for the industry, especially in Pennsylvania.”
But it's not all troubling. Inventory growth is high nationwide, and Pennsylvania is no exception, with inventory growth of 8.1 percent. How those firms fare in collecting that inventory will shape the rest of the year.
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 All'The World Didn't End This Morning': Phila. Firm Leaders Respond to Election Results
4 minute readSettlement With Kleinbard in Diversity Contracting Tiff Allows Pa. Lawyer to Avoid Sanctions
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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