Rising Litigation Fees: What Is the Cause?
Members of the litigation bar are aware of the rising hourly rate for major law firm partners; however, even experienced trial partners in the bar are somewhat shocked at the new rates. So are the clients, who continue to pay them.
November 12, 2024 at 12:03 PM
4 minute read
Leadership
Law partners are charging $2,000/hour and $1,000/hour for associates. Recent law school graduates with no experience are starting at $200,000/year. These figures are not from a novel about what the new Great Gatsby era might look like; they are real numbers in an article in the Oct. 5, 2024, edition of the Wall Street Journal about litigation managed by major law firms in the United States. Members of the litigation bar are aware of the rising hourly rate for major law firm partners; however, even experienced trial partners in the bar are somewhat shocked at the new rates. So are the clients, who continue to pay them.
An appropriate question is how this billing practice is affecting the bar, firm management committees, new law school graduates and potential clients. Take a step back and view the law profession from the position of middle America business owners, family members and new law school graduates.
An easy answer is that this billing practice only affects a very small portion of the bar who have clients who can pass the costs onto their corporate shareholders. But this large hourly rate movement has been expanding nationwide for several years, especially as the result of the many law firm mergers. The Wall Street Journal article cites a 9% legal fee rise in legal fee costs in the first half of 2024, compared to an 8, 3% last year. Some very experienced trial lawyers have confided that they are planning to leave their firms as they cannot charge the hourly rate required by the new procedures set by the firms after mergers. This is especially true with experienced criminal lawyers who are a mainstay of the bar. A great many clients are not corporations who can pass the costs to the shareholders.
Recently there has been a movement in the bar to bring more professional leadership training into the operation of law firms, such as training in management and client development skills, rather than promoting those persons who can bill the most hours. See Vaira, "Leadership Training for Lawyers Is Time Well Spent," Legal Intelligencer, March 6, 2023. This is a positive step in the right direction. My alma mater, Thomas R. Kline School of Law of Duquesne University, offers a full semester class in leadership, which is taught by persons from commercial business firms, the military and law firms. It is very popular with the students and has caught the attention of the bar. Large commercial corporations offer leadership training to their personnel in the field; however, very few law firms offer any leadership training. A good law firm management program can help control the billing rates of the firm.
Commentators of the legal profession have observed that some of the reasons for the rising rates are the client corporations who do not shop the market. The WSJ article cites Heineken general counsel who said, “You can get the same quality (of representation) for half the price.”
A new factor in this equation is the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in legal research by the law firms. A great deal of nuts-and-bolts legal work can be drastically reduced by the use of AI. How this is going to work out is going to be a study of technique and legal ethics. I predict that AI skills will become a legal specialty of certain firms.
A major factor that must be considered by law firms, clients, educators, and bar associations, is how this high priced hourly rate will affect new law graduates who must make a choice of what area of the law to pursue, in addition to considering how much of a salary they can obtain. Some niche disciplines, necessary for law practice of family law or small business administration, are not offered by many large law firms, as they do not require mass billing sessions.
There are no quick answers to the growing hourly rates for law firm partners and associates. The issue requires attention by law firm leadership, bar associations, educators, and the business community who pays the bills. I suggest the Philadelphia Bar Association create a “leadership committee” with members from law firms, in house counsel, educators and experienced trial lawyers.
Peter Vaira is a member of Weir LLP. He is a former U.S. attorney and the author of a book on Eastern District practice. He acts as special hearing master for Pennsylvania courts and clients. He can be reached at [email protected].
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 AllWith Chair Regularly on the Road, Duane Morris Names First Phila. Office Managing Partner
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gordon Rees Opens 80th Office, ‘Collaboration Hub’ in Palo Alto
- 2The White Stripes Drop Copyright Claim Against Trump Campaign
- 3Law Firm Accused of Barratry for Allegedly Soliciting Crash Victims
- 4Carlton Fields Downsizes in Move to New Atlanta Office
- 5Trump's Selection of Zeldin to Head EPA Draws Surprise, Little Hope of Avoiding Deregulation
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