12 California Firms Make Am Law 100 List
In a year of stronger demand industrywide, few California firms made big jumps on the Am Law 100, despite revenue growth.
April 23, 2019 at 06:10 PM
2 minute read
In a year of strong revenue growth, a dozen law firms from California have landed a spot on the 2019 Am Law 100 list, which released by The American Lawyer on Tuesday.
The list included six firms from Northern California and six others based in Southern California, though some have now grown to the point where their largest offices are outside California. Nearly all of the firms reported solid gross revenue growth last year, with one exception.
Morrison & Foerster, which led the Bay-Area pack along with Cooley last year, dropped to 33rd place from 28th, as gross revenue decreased by 1.9 percent to $1.04 billion.
Cooley, on the other hand, saw its revenue jump 14.4 percent to $1.23 billion, moving up by three ranks from 27th to 24th.
Other Bay Area firms that also reported revenue gains are Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe (33rd, at $1.05 billion); Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati (46th, at $857 million); Fenwick & West (85th, at $429.69 million); and global labor and employment law firm Littler Mendelson (64th, at $584.2 million).
Fenwick made the biggest gains in the Am Law 100 rankings, moving up from 10 places to 85th, as revenue jumped by 14.6 percent to $429.69 million in 2018.
Los Angeles-based Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith; saw the most significant revenue growth of the California firms, boosting it five places, to 66th, after gross revenue increased by 17.20 percent to $552 million in 2018.
The other Southern California firms that landed on the Am Law 100 this year were Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher; O'Melveny & Myers; Paul Hastings; Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan; and Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton. They all saw gross revenue grow last year.
Latham & Watkins, which was founded in Los Angeles, grabbed the No. 2 spot on this year's Am Law 100 list, with gross revenue of $3.39 billion last year.
The top spot on the list went to Kirkland & Ellis, which posted gross revenue of $3.757 billion.
This content has been archived.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 AllNew Class Action Points to Fears Over Privacy, Abortions and Fertility
Deception or Coercion? California Supreme Court Grants Review in Jailhouse Confession Case
5 minute readCourt rejects request to sideline San Jose State volleyball player on grounds she’s transgender
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Judge Denies Sean Combs Third Bail Bid, Citing Community Safety
- 2Republican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
- 3NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
- 4A Meta DIG and Its Nvidia Implications
- 5Deception or Coercion? California Supreme Court Grants Review in Jailhouse Confession Case
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