The 2021 State of the Legal Market Report | BCGSearch.com

The 2021 State of the Legal Market Report

3997

Print/Download PDF

Font Size

Rate this article

416 Reviews Average: 4.2 out of 5

Harrison Barnes' Legal Career Advice Podcast - Episode 46

Learn more about this topic by listening to this podcast
00:00 00:00
Listen to This Podcast on:

The 2021 State of the Legal Market: The Top 20 Reasons the 2020 Legal Market Was So Unique and Harrison’s 118 Predictions for the 2021 Legal Market
 

Table of Contents
 
  1. The Traditional Understanding of What Everyone Wants (Who is Buying What) is what Guides Most Legal Recruiters
  2. The Traditional Understanding of Who is Buying Has Always Guided Most Legal Recruiting Firms to Large Law Firms
  3. Everyone Not Marketable Before is Now Marketable
  4. Look at what happened in 2020
  5. Rank of Candidates Interviewing at the 200 Largest American Law Firms in 2020
  6. 2020 Hiring and Interview Statistics for BCG Attorney Search
  7. 2020 Growth or Decline by Practice Area
  8. Placements - 2020 Growth or decline
  9. Interviews - 2020 Growth or decline
  10. Regions Differences in Interviews and Placements Between 2020 and 2019
  11. Interviews - Average Growth by Practice Area & Region
  12. Placements - Average Growth by Practice Area & Region
  13. Practice Area Growth
  14. Firm Location
  15. The Top Twenty Reasons the 2020 Legal Market Was So Unique
  16. Percentage of Interviews in by Firm Size 2020
  17. Hiring in Firms of Different Sizes
  18. I Assumed That Work Would Slow Down in Major Markets For Lateral Attorneys and Get Busier in Smaller Markets
  19. I Expected Tons of First-Year Layoffs and Widespread Cancellation of Summer Programs Would Occur
  20. I Assumed Larger Law Firms Would Slow Down in Specific Practice Areas (Such as Corporate), Other Practice Areas Would Pick Up (Bankruptcy, Litigation, Employment), and Some Practice Areas Would Remain Steady (Patent)
  21. I Assumed That Laid-Off Attorneys Would Have Difficulty Finding New Positions with Equivalent Firms Ever Again
  22. Fifteen Things I Did Not Assume, or Even Think or Talk About that Happened in 2020
  23. I Assumed Law Firms Only Very Rarely Hire People Without Meeting Them Face to Face
  24. I Assumed That Law Firms Would Continue to Prefer Lateral Attorneys from the Existing Market, or Who Were Moving Home to Where They Are From
  25. I Assumed There Would Not Be A Lot of Opportunistic Hiring And Law Firms Would Confine Their Hiring To Openings
  26. I Assumed that Law Firms Would Continue to Need Face Time from their Attorneys
  27. I Assumed Lateral Hiring Would Decrease in the Largest Law Firms, but Not to the Degree it Did
  28. I Never Assumed How Widespread Law Firm Staff Layoffs Would Be
  29. I Never Assumed So Many Law Firms Would Get Forgivable Loans to Keep them Afloat
  30. I Never Assumed that So Many Businesses Would Succeed During the Pandemic and there Would be Such Economic Optimism in the Stock Market
  31. I Never Assumed Law Firms Would Reduce their Fixed Cost so Dramatically and Put Themselves in Such a Dominant Position to be Profitable in the Future
  32. I Never Assumed Attorneys and Remote Work Would Become So Universally Accepted, and Attorneys Would Start Working Remotely from All Over the World
  33. I Never Assumed that Senior Litigators (With No Business) Would Become So in Demand in Various Areas of the Country
  34. I Never Expected the Pressure that Social Movements Would Place on Law Firms to Change Throughout the Country
  35. I Never Expected So Many Smaller to Medium-Sized Law Firms to Have So Much Trouble Finding and Recruiting the Right People in All Practice Areas
  36. I Never Anticipated the Number of People that Large and Small Law Firms Would Start Interviewing for Each Position and the Competition for Each Job
Harrison's 118 Predictions for 2021

A review of these various hiring criteria is unimpo

The 2020 legal market was the most unusual I have seen in my entire career—including the bumps of 2000, 2001, and 2008 through 2011. At no time in history did I see a market fraught both with dangers for the unprepared and opportunity for law firms and attorneys who understand its current rules. And there are rules in all markets. The ability of law firms to understand these rules helps them make more money. The power of candidates to understand these rules keeps them employed and earning as much money as possible.
   

The Traditional Understanding of What Everyone Wants (Who is Buying What) is what Guides Most Legal Recruiters


Most legal recruiters in the United States are guided by some simple rules about what law firms want. These are the rules I learned early on, and most legal recruiters believe today. It is flat out wrong now. It changed in 2020. I could compare these now antiquated rules to such statements as "the Earth is flat" or "a flying machine is impossible." These rules are just not appropriate anymore in the current economy.

All recruiting firms sell labor to buyers. They find organizations that need a specific type of worker, do the legwork to find those workers, understand if the worker is a good fit for what the clients want, and get paid by the employer if they find that worker. It has always been this way. Law firms and other organizations make lots of money with labor and because of this, are more than happy to pay for labor that can make them money. The cost of recruiter fees is less than 5% of the revenue an attorney will generate in a year for them. It is a good deal.


I will not focus so much on the numbers as exploring the idea of "who is buying" and "who is getting bought." These are among the most important factors in understanding where the legal market is right now and where things are headed.
 TOP
 

The Traditional Understanding of Who is Buying Has Always Guided Most Legal Recruiting Firms to Large Law Firms


Traditionally, legal recruiting firms that make permanent placements focus on recruiting and placing attorneys in the largest law firms. Smaller law firms and law firms in niche markets have not used recruiters throughout history because legal recruiters were not interested in them. They did not understand the value proposition. Large law firms in major markets are significant businesses and use legal recruiters to generate hundreds of millions of dollars per year. Recruiters are traditionally concentrated in the largest cities and markets because this is where the buyers are. For example, for years, there was only one legal recruiter in Detroit (one person)—because the market was too small. Recruiters in major cities with lots of firms competed for the same people.

These large law firms traditionally represented significant businesses, paid high salaries (market), would be found on various lists of the largest and most profitable law firms, and practiced in the most profitable areas like litigation, corporate, real estate, and others. These large law firms did not concentrate on representing consumers. Most of their clients were businesses you have heard of.

These large law firms traditionally have sophisticated recruiting departments that demand recruiters send them the best people. Most legal recruiters work for these recruiting departments and are guided by their demands. These law firms set a tone that means most recruiters will not work with smaller law firms and look down on small firms and attorneys from them. They get their fees from law firms that make and have access to enormous sums of money to hire the best attorneys.

I taught myself early on that law firms that used recruiters needed to access "waterfalls of money." This means they represent tons of large clients who think nothing of writing checks for $50,000 to $250,000+ per month to outside attorneys and can afford to do so. Enough clients like this, and the law firm is "flush," and money is no issue. These are large businesses or extraordinarily successful entrepreneurs that can afford to do this.

Because most recruiters believe that the largest and most prestigious law firms are the ones who use legal recruiters, it is not unusual for attorneys in the largest cities like New York to get 10+ calls about each job opening at a major law firm in the market.

This has changed over the past several years. Legal recruiters at BCG Attorney Search who have this mindset are no longer successful. One of our recruiters went from making 30 placements a year fifteen years ago to making only a few now. This no longer works.

Based on the Traditional Understanding of What Buyers Want, Most Legal Recruiting Firms Think Law Firms Only Want:
 
  • Attorneys Matching Their Actual Openings. Most recruiters believe that law firms are only interested in attorneys matching their actual openings. Therefore, if the law firm does not have an opening, and the attorney does not match what the law firm is seeking, the recruiter will not try to get the law firm interested.
  • Attorneys Coming from the Best Law Firms. Most recruiters believe only attorneys from the best law firms will get jobs with other large law firms. Most legal recruiters badger only people from the largest law firms and not smaller firms.
  • Attorneys from the Best Schools or at the Top of Their Class at Lesser Law Schools. Most legal recruiters believe that the attorneys coming from the best law schools are most marketable. They will look up schools and speak about them as if an attorney from a lesser school is not worth their time.
  • Attorneys with 2 to 6 Years of Experience. We typically think attorneys with less than a year of experience require lots of training. Attorneys with over six years of experience are too close to partnership and will often need to be asked to leave when they do not make partner. The sweet spot for most legal recruiters is between one and six years of experience where attorneys typically are profitable, know what they are doing, and are not a threat.
  • Attorneys in Economically Appropriate Practice Areas. The most economically appropriate practice area during a good economy is typically anything corporate or "deal" related. This is where most of the attention goes from legal recruiters and others. In average to poor economies, there is more hiring in litigation. During low-interest-rate environments, real estate has typically been busy. When the economy is slow and having significant issues, bankruptcy is often healthy.
  • Attorneys in the Right Practice Areas. Specific practice areas have traditionally been believed to be good for recruiters and others. The more "big firm-related" the practice area, the more likely it was to be a source of interest for recruiters: corporate, real estate, intellectual property litigation, finance, and similar practice areas. The more consumer-facing or unprofitable the practice area, the less placeable the attorney is likely to be (personal injury, immigration, insurance defense, trust and estates, and family law, for example).
  • Attorneys with as Few Jobs as Possible Who Look Committed. Law firms want to hire people who look like they will stick around. It is expensive financially and a moral drain to hire people who are likely to leave. Law firms want to hire attorneys who look like they are going to be stable.
  • For Partnership Roles, Attorneys with at Least a Few Million Dollars in Business (in Most Large Cities). The largest law firms are most interested in partners with substantial business that they believe will go with them. This requirement could exceed several million dollars a year at the most prestigious law firms in the largest cities. Most law firms want their partners to be self-supporting and able to give work to associates. They want these partners taking home around 20 to 35% of their collections and the rest to go to the firm.
  • Attorneys Who Are Currently Employed. Law firms have traditionally shied away from unemployed attorneys because of various prejudices. Law firms have always seemed to believe that unemployed attorneys are not committed, were problems at their previous firm, or have other issues that make them not worthwhile.
  • Attorneys Who Can Impress Law Firms with Their Qualifications and Not Always Their Individuality and Personality. The belief has always been that attorneys are "commodities" whose qualifications are the most important component when hiring them. The attorney's outside interests, individuality, and personality are unimportant to the law firm.

A review of these various hiring criteria is unimportant because, incredibly, most of this no longer applies in the legal placement market—the market has changed. In 2020, almost everyone was buying everything. Is this a temporary development? I have no idea. I know that I have never seen a market so open to using legal recruiters in my career. Although most law firms have their career sites, most law firms also post their jobs publicly, and a great number of attorneys are applying to these firms regardless of whether they have openings.
 TOP
 

Everyone Not Marketable Before is Now Marketable


At the outset, I want to state something so unique I cannot believe I am writing it: The market in 2020 shifted so dramatically that our company went from rejecting almost every single candidate who approached our firm for help because they did not fit our criteria of a "placeable" candidate, to leaving no one. The market in 2020 (from our perspective) was better than it has ever been.

Years ago, we used to be "snobs" and believe only attorneys with the best pedigrees (from the best law schools, working at the best law firms) were worthy of our attention. We rejected so many people that job boards, attorneys, and others often believed we were not a recruiting firm and merely trying to harvest resumes. However, over the past several years, the market has been opening considerably. In 2018 and 2019, we saw attorneys in niche practice areas and locations becoming increasingly employable through us. Then, in 2020, we suddenly were placing clerks of all sorts, law students, first-year attorneys, very senior attorneys, attorneys in consumer practice areas (like worker's compensation, family law, and more) and even had law firms begging us to send them attorneys and hire them. In contrast, many significant law firms slowed down and were not hiring as aggressively as they did in the past.

We have always followed a ranking system for candidates and law firms, ranking each from a 1 to a 5. You can learn more about this ranking system here: https://www.bcgsearch.com/article/900046515/How-to-Easily-Determine-the-Best-Attorneys-and-Law-Firms-The-Five-Prestige-Levels-of-Attorneys-and-Law-Firms/

Essentially, it is like this:
 
  • Candidates Ranked “5”:

    Candidates ranked a “5” typically are from major law firms, went to good law schools and did very well there and are in practice areas that are in demand. These candidates typically are quite suited for practicing law; they are professional and motivated. They generally are not leaving their existing firms due to any problems they are having at those firms. They are often attorneys who are relocating or have reasons for switching firms that make perfect sense. If they are partners, they have large books of business that will generally exceed $3,000,000 and this business will be on behalf of large, national clients. If they are associates, they generally have between 1 and 6 years of experience.
  • Candidates Ranked “4”:

    Candidates ranked a “4” typically went to top law schools or worked at a “4” or “5” firm. A candidate will generally be ranked a “4” if the attorney has between 1 and 6 years of experience, is at a top law firm and in a marketable practice area. Attorneys from top firms with over $1,000,000 in business are generally “4s” in terms of their marketability but may not necessarily be able to get into “4” or “5” firms. An associate candidate is generally a “4” if he or she is at a “4” or better firm—regardless of his or her law school performance provided the attorney is (1) in a good practice area and (2) does not have too many moves on his or her resume.
  • Candidates Ranked “3”:

    Candidates ranked a “3” can be quite strong, but they generally are not. They almost always do not have the academic or personal qualifications needed to get a position in a “4” or “5” law firm. Notwithstanding, they are solid attorneys despite not having top-notch qualifications. Attorneys who get positions in “3” law firms may or may not have outstanding academic qualifications. The issue with a “3” attorney compared to a “4” attorney is generally that you can point to one or more things in the attorney’s background that makes that candidate not suitable to working at a law firm ranked a “4” or a “5.” For example, the attorney may (1) have performed poorly in a top law school, (2) have gone to a poor law school, (3) have too many moves on his or her resume, (4) be in an unmarketable practice area, (5) never have been a summer associate in a major law firm, (6) have more than 7 years of experience, or (7) be a partner without enough business to be marketable.
  • Candidates Ranked “2”:

    Candidates ranked a “2” are generally “average” without any distinguishing characteristics. They are good attorneys capable of doing satisfactory work, but not stellar. Attorneys who could otherwise be “3s” or “4s” are often a “2” because they made some mistakes earlier in their careers, or otherwise. Candidates who are a “2” are rarely marketable by legal recruiters because they do not have any distinguishing skills or talents that make them stick out. Attorneys ranked a “2” comprise the majority of attorneys out there. Because they are doing a significant amount of work for low-paying clients and often individuals, these attorneys rarely learn the skills to fully document transactions or do a great deal of work in litigation. Their work tends to be “spotty” compared to what you see from attorneys in “4” and above firms and often there are typos, missed arguments and things that are not thought of or documented in transactions. This is not necessarily because the attorneys are not capable of this, it is because the attorneys’ firms do not have the time to train these attorneys to do this sort of work.
  • Candidates Ranked “1”:

    Most “1” candidates have poor training, inconsistent work performance, average to poor law schools and have worked at “1” firms in the past. Law firms that hire them (when they have openings) do not have the highest standard for those that they hire. Any attorney can work in a “1” firm. There is nothing wrong with “1” attorneys, of course, other than the fact that they do not have the qualifications needed to work at a higher ranked law firm. These sorts of attorneys comprise the majority of attorneys practicing at small to solo practice law firms throughout the United States.
For obvious reasons, almost all legal recruiters have traditionally placed and gotten interviews for candidates ranked a 4 or a 5. In 2015-2018, over 85% of our interviews and placements of candidates were of 4 or 5 candidates. In previous years it was in the 90th percentile.
 
 TOP
Look at what happened in 2020.
 
Candidate Rank Candidate Percentage of Interviews
5 9.91%
4 21.7%
3 39.2%
2 21.8%
1 6.68%
 
Candidate Percentage of Interviews

Today, we believe virtually every attorney is marketable. Unable to work with most attorneys, we used to refer people to our sister companies such as LawCrossing.com that were initially set up to help people we could not get jobs for at BCG Attorney Search. There has traditionally been a vast “market inefficiency” that made all but the best candidates marketable through a recruiting firm. Now, practically everyone seems marketable through a recruiting firm—it does not matter where they live, their practice area, or even (in many cases) their seniority.

Amazingly, despite less hiring in 2020, larger law firms also were more willing to hire and bring in candidates they traditionally would not. For example, the largest law firms typically interview only 4 and 5 candidates. Look what happened in 2020.

Rank of Candidates Interviewing at the 200 Largest American Law Firms in 2020

 
Candidate Rank Percentage of Interviews
5 18%
4 4.6%
3 39.3%
2 9%
1 3.4%
 
Rank of Candidates Interviewing

The market has changed. We are becoming better at what we do. We are using data science, getting better at working with candidates, training our recruiters more, and making them more accountable – still, we cannot help but notice a major shift in the market that is driving great demand for more types of attorneys from law firm clients. We cannot work with everyone who approaches us right now, of course, but the odds are that we will have something for them in the future.

This is astonishing news from a legal recruiter and is a sign of an unprecedented sea change. Not only did the market improve in 2020, but it is also better than it has ever been. More types of people are employable than ever before. It is almost as if a social movement has changed the very fabric of the legal market itself. In the week before Christmas, one of our recruiters made four placements. In the week before New Year’s, we kept making placements. The market is ravenous for attorneys if you know where to look.

A review of these various hiring criteria is largely unimportant because, incredibly, most of this no longer applies in the legal placement market—the market has changed fundamentally. In 2020, almost everyone was buying everything. Is this a temporary development? I have no idea. I know that I have never seen a market so open to using legal recruiters in my career. This comes even though most law firms have their career sites, most law firms post their jobs publicly, and many attorneys are applying to these firms regardless of whether they have openings.
 TOP
 

2020 Hiring and Interview Statistics for BCG Attorney Search

 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Alcohol Beverage Law 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 27 34
Interviews Alcohol Beverage Law 0.00% 0.02% 100.00% 38 37
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Antitrust and Competition 0.00% 1.01% 100.00% 28 19
Interviews Antitrust and Competition 0.42% 0.84% 97.82% 24 24
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Banking and Finance 4.70% 4.38% -6.84% 5 6
Interviews Banking and Finance 2.85% 3.36% 17.66% 8 7
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Banking and Finance 4.70% 4.38% -6.84% 5 6
Interviews Banking and Finance 2.85% 3.36% 17.66% 8 7
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Corporate 14.77% 6.84% -53.67% 3 2
Interviews Corporate 13.85% 8.40% -39.35% 2 2
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Data Privacy 1.34% 1.88% 40.36% 12 14
Interviews Data Privacy 0.74% 1.43% 93.42% 18 14
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Education 0.67% 0.58% -13.62% 19 26
Interviews Education 0.63% 0.90% 42.13% 21 21
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Electric Power 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 29 35
Interviews Electric Power 0.00% 0.06% 100.00% 37 36
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Energy and Oil & Gas 0.67% 0.65% -2.83% 20 24
Interviews Energy and Oil & Gas 0.53% 0.90% 69.98% 22 22
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Entertainment and New Media 0.67% 0.29% -56.81% 21 32
Interviews Entertainment and New Media 0.42% 1.15% 171.08% 23 16
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Environmental and Land Use 0.67% 1.52% 126.74% 22 16
Interviews Environmental and Land Use 2.54% 1.13% -55.55% 10 17
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements ERISA/Executive Compensation 1.34% 0.72% -46.01% 13 23
Interviews ERISA/Executive Compensation 1.16% 0.71% -38.72% 16 26
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Family Law 0.00% 3.77% 100.00% 30 8
Interviews Family Law 0.21% 1.82% 758.67% 25 13
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Food & Drug Administration 0.00% 2.17% 100.00% 31 12
Interviews Food & Drug Administration 0.00% 0.86% 100.00% 32 23
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Government and Government Relations 0.00% 0.14% 100.00% 32 33
Interviews Government and Government Relations 0.00% 0.61% 100.00% 33 29
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Government Contracts 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 33 36
Interviews Government Contracts 0.21% 0.19% -12.08% 29 34
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Healthcare 1.34% 0.29% -78.41% 14 31
Interviews Healthcare 1.80% 0.77% -56.90% 13 25
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Immigration 0.67% 0.87% 29.57% 23 20
Interviews Immigration 0.21% 0.68% 222.37% 26 27
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Insurance Coverage 2.01% 0.43% -78.41% 10 28
Interviews Insurance Coverage 0.74% 1.28% 72.91% 19 15
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Insurance Defense 6.71% 2.13% -68.26% 4 13
Interviews Insurance Defense 3.70% 2.17% -41.39% 6 11
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Intellectual Property 0.00% 0.87% 100.00% 34 22
Interviews Intellectual Property 0.00% 1.01% 100.00% 31 20
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Intellectual Property - Litigation 2.01% 2.39% 18.77% 11 10
Interviews Intellectual Property - Litigation 2.85% 2.90% 1.49% 9 8
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution 2.68% 4.86% 80.85% 8 5
Interviews Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution 4.65% 5.76% 23.88% 4 3
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements International Trade 0.67% 0.87% 29.57% 24 21
Interviews International Trade 0.21% 0.36% 68.51% 28 32
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements IP- Trademark/Copyright 1.34% 1.38% 2.57% 15 17
Interviews IP- Trademark/Copyright 1.80% 1.86% 3.43% 12 12
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Labor & Employment 17.45% 6.30% -63.87% 2 3
Interviews Labor & Employment 12.58% 3.98% -68.35% 3 5
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Litigation 25.50% 36.19% 41.90% 1 1
Interviews Litigation 32.98% 38.17% 15.74% 1 1
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Maritime and Transportation 0.00% 0.43% 100.00% 35 30
Interviews Maritime and Transportation 0.00% 0.14% 100.00% 36 35
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Municipal Law 1.34% 0.43% -67.61% 16 29
Interviews Municipal Law 0.21% 0.53% 152.03% 27 30
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Other 0.00% 0.65% 100.00% 36 25
Interviews Other 0.00% 0.28% 100.00% 35 33
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Patent Agents 0.67% 2.61% 288.70% 25 9
Interviews Patent Agents 1.80% 0.62% -65.52% 14 28
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Real Estate 4.70% 5.54% 17.84% 6 4
Interviews Real Estate 4.12% 5.73% 39.09% 5 4
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Tax 3.36% 2.17% -35.22% 7 11
Interviews Tax 3.59% 2.22% -38.20% 7 10
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Technology Transactions 0.67% 1.30% 94.35% 26 18
Interviews Technology Transactions 0.74% 1.01% 36.90% 20 19
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Telecommunications 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 37 37
Interviews Telecommunications 0.21% 0.00% -100.00% 30 38
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Trust and Estates 1.34% 1.74% 29.57% 17 15
Interviews Trust and Estates 2.33% 2.66% 14.56% 11 9
 
Status Practice Area 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Workers Compensation 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 38 38
Interviews Workers Compensation 0.00% 0.50% 100.00% 34 31
 TOP
 
2020-Growth-or-Decline-by-Practice-Area
 
 
 TOP

Regions Differences in Interviews and Placements Between 2020 and 2019

Interviews-Average-Growth-by-Region
 
Interviews-Average-Growth-by-Region
 
 
 
 TOP
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Alcohol Beverage Law 0.00% 0.02% 100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements East Antitrust and Competition 0.00% 0.43% 100.00%
Placements West Antitrust and Competition 0.00% 0.58% 100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Antitrust and Competition 0.21% 0.53% 149.10%
Interviews West Antitrust and Competition 0.21% 0.31% 46.53%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements East Banking and Finance 3.36% 3.04% -9.3%
Placements Midwest Banking and Finance 0.67% 0.29% -56.81%
Placements South Banking and Finance 0.67% 0.43% -35.22%
Placements Southwest Banking and Finance 0.00% 0.17% 100.00%
Placements West Banking and Finance 0.00% 0.43% 100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Banking and Finance 1.59% 2.18% 37.74%
Interviews Midwest Banking and Finance 0.85% 0.06% -92.67%
Interviews South Banking and Finance 0.11% 0.53% 398.20%
Interviews Southwest Banking and Finance 0.00% 0.08% 100.00%
Interviews West Banking and Finance 0.32% 0.50% 58.25%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements East Bankruptcy 0.67% 2.39% 256.30%
Placements South Bankruptcy 0.00% 1.74% 100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Bankruptcy 0.11% 2.35% 2127.26%
Interviews Midwest Bankruptcy 0.00% 0.15% 100.00%
Interviews South Bankruptcy 0.00% 0.65% 100.00%
Interviews Southwest Bankruptcy 0.00% 0.05% 100.00%
Interviews West Bankruptcy 0.63% 0.74% 17.22%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements East Construction 1.34% 0.00% -100.00%
Placements Midwest Construction 0.67% 0.00% -100.00%
Placements West Construction 0.00% 0.43% 100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Construction 0.32% 0.59% 85.61%
Interviews Midwest Construction 0.53% 0.00% -100.00%
Interviews South Construction 0.00% 0.09% 100.00%
Interviews Southwest Construction 0.11% 0.09% -12.08%
Interviews West Construction 0.21% 0.28% 31.88%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements East Corporate 7.38% 3.91% -47.00%
Placements Midwest Corporate 2.68% 0.72% -73.01%
Placements South Corporate 0.67% 1.16% 72.75%
Placements Southwest Corporate 0.67% 0.17% -74.09%
Placements West Corporate 3.36% 0.87% -74.09%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Corporate 7.40% 4.26% -42.43%
Interviews Midwest Corporate 2.33% 1.21% -47.78%
Interviews South Corporate 0.42% 1.24% 193.06%
Interviews Southwest Corporate 0.21% 0.32% 49.46%
Interviews West Corporate 3.49% 1.37% -60.75%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements Midwest Data Privacy 0.00% 0.14% 100.00%
Placements West Data Privacy 1.34% 1.74% 29.57%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Data Privacy 0.00% 0.50% 100.00%
Interviews Midwest Data Privacy 0.00% 0.16% 100.00%
Interviews South Data Privacy 0.11% 0.00% -100.00%
Interviews Southwest Data Privacy 0.00% 0.03% 100.00%
Interviews West Data Privacy 0.63% 0.74% 17.22%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements East Education 0.00% 0.29% 100.00%
Placements West Education 0.67% 0.29% -56.81%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Education 0.42% 0.45% 6.97%
Interviews Southwest Education 0.00% 0.05% 100.00%
Interviews West Education 0.21% 0.40% 90.49%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Electric Power 0.00% 0.06% 100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements Midwest Energy and Oil & Gas 0.00% 0.36% 100.00%
Placements South Energy and Oil & Gas 0.00% 0.29% 100.00%
Placements West Energy and Oil & Gas 0.67% 0.00% -100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Energy and Oil & Gas 0.21% 0.34% 61.18%
Interviews Midwest Energy and Oil & Gas 0.21% 0.19% -12.08%
Interviews South Energy and Oil & Gas 0.11% 0.19% 75.84%
Interviews Southwest Energy and Oil & Gas 0.00% 0.09% 100.00%
Interviews West Energy and Oil & Gas 0.00% 0.09% 100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements South Entertainment and New Media 0.00% 0.29% 100.00%
Placements West Entertainment and New Media 0.67% 0.00% +100.00&
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Entertainment and New Media 0.11% 0.11% 5.50%
Interviews Midwest Entertainment and New Media 0.00% 0.04% 100.00%
Interviews South Entertainment and New Media 0.00% 0.25% 100.00%
Interviews West Entertainment and New Media 0.32% 0.74% 134.45%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements East Environmental and Land Use 0.00% 0.43% 100.00%
Placements Midwest Environmental and Land Use 0.00% 0.22% 100.00%
Placements West Environmental and Land Use 0.67% 0.87% 29.57%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Environmental and Land Use 0.74% 0.50% -32.18%
Interviews Midwest Environmental and Land Use 0.32% 0.00% -100.00%
Interviews South Environmental and Land Use 0.11% 0.00% -100.00%
Interviews West Environmental and Land Use 1.37% 0.63% -54.46%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements East ERISA/Executive Compensation 0.00% 0.72% 100.00%
Placements Midwest ERISA/Executive Compensation 0.67% 0.00% -100.00%
Placements West ERISA/Executive Compensation 0.67% 0.00% -100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East ERISA/Executive Compensation 0.42% 0.34% -19.41%
Interviews Midwest ERISA/Executive Compensation 0.11% 0.09% -12.08%
Interviews South ERISA/Executive Compensation 0.11% 0.00% -100.00%
Interviews West ERISA/Executive Compensation 0.53% 0.28% -47.25%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements East Family Law 0.00% 2.61% 100.00%
Placements Midwest Family Law 0.00% 1.16% 100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Family Law 0.00% 0.82% 100.00%
Interviews Midwest Family Law 0.11% 0.53% 398.20%
Interviews South Family Law 0.00% 0.37% 100.00%
Interviews Southwest Family Law 0.00% 0.03% 100.00%
Interviews West Family Law 0.11% 0.06% -41.39%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements East Food & Drug Administration 0.00% 1.74% 100.00%
Placements South Food & Drug Administration 0.00% 0.43% 100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Food & Drug Administration 0.00% 0.48% 100.00%
Interviews South Food & Drug Administration 0.00% 0.28% 100.00%
Interviews Southwest Food & Drug Administration 0.00% 0.09% 100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements West Government and Government Relations 0.00% 0.14% 100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Government and Government Relations 0.00% 0.33% 100.00%
Interviews South Government and Government Relations 0.00% 0.06% 100.00%
Interviews West Government and Government Relations 0.00% 0.22% 100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Government Contracts 0.11% 0.12% 17.22%
Interviews West Government Contracts 0.11% 0.06% -41.39%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements Midwest Healthcare 0.00% 0.29% 100.00%
Placements West Healthcare 1.34% 0.00% -100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Healthcare 0.21% 0.56% 163.75%
Interviews Midwest Healthcare 0.63% 0.06% -90.23%
Interviews South Healthcare 0.32% 0.00% -100.00%
Interviews Southwest Healthcare 0.00% 0.09% 100.00%
Interviews West Healthcare 0.63% 0.06% -90.23%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements Midwest Immigration 0.67% 0.00% -100.00%
Placements West Immigration 0.00% 0.87% 100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Immigration 0.00% 0.12% 100.00%
Interviews Midwest Immigration 0.11% 0.28% 163.75%
Interviews Southwest Immigration 0.00% 0.03% 100.00%
Interviews West Immigration 0.11% 0.25% 134.45%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements Midwest Insurance Coverage 0.67% 0.00% -100.00%
Placements West Insurance Coverage 1.34% 0.43% -67.61%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Insurance Coverage 0.11% 0.62% 489.05%
Interviews Midwest Insurance Coverage 0.32% 0.20% -36.50%
Interviews South Insurance Coverage 0.00% 0.04% 100.00%
Interviews Southwest Insurance Coverage 0.00% 0.05% 100.00%
Interviews West Insurance Coverage 0.32% 0.37% 17.22%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements East Insurance Defense 4.70% 0.00% -100.00%
Placements Midwest Insurance Defense 0.00% 0.65% 100.00%
Placements South Insurance Defense 0.67% 0.43% -35.22%
Placements Southwest Insurance Defense 0.00% 0.17% 100.00%
Placements West Insurance Defense 1.34% 0.87% -35.22%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Insurance Defense 1.90% 0.87% -54.25%
Interviews Midwest Insurance Defense 0.85% 0.48% -43.22%
Interviews South Insurance Defense 0.11% 0.13% 23.09%
Interviews Southwest Insurance Defense 0.21% 0.18% -16.48%
Interviews West Insurance Defense 0.63% 0.51% -19.41%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements Midwest Intellectual Property 0.00% 0.29% 100.00%
Placements South Intellectual Property 0.00% 0.43% 100.00%
Placements West Intellectual Property 0.00% 0.14% 100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Intellectual Property 0.00% 0.48% 100.00%
Interviews Midwest Intellectual Property 0.00% 0.31% 100.00%
Interviews South Intellectual Property 0.00% 0.09% 100.00%
Interviews Southwest Intellectual Property 0.00% 0.03% 100.00%
Interviews West Intellectual Property 0.00% 0.09% 100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements East Intellectual Property - Litigation 2.01% 1.52% -24.42%
Placements Midwest Intellectual Property - Litigation 0.00% 0.43% 100.00%
Placements West Intellectual Property - Litigation 0.00% 0.43% 100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Intellectual Property - Litigation 1.27% 1.25% -1.09%
Interviews Midwest Intellectual Property - Litigation 0.42% 0.50% 17.22%
Interviews South Intellectual Property - Litigation 0.11% 0.19% 75.84%
Interviews Southwest Intellectual Property - Litigation 0.00% 0.09% 100.00%
Interviews West Intellectual Property - Litigation 1.06% 0.87% -17.94%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements East Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution 2.68% 2.39% -10.92%
Placements Midwest Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution 0.00% 0.72% 100.00%
Placements Southwest Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution 0.00% 0.87% 100.00%
Placements West Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution 0.00% 0.87% 100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution 2.11% 4.09% 93.42%
Interviews Midwest Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution 1.37% 0.65% -52.66%
Interviews South Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution 0.11% 0.19% 75.84%
Interviews Southwest Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution 0.42% 0.28% -34.06%
Interviews West Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution 0.63% 0.56% -12.08%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements East International Trade 0.67% 0.00% -100.00%
Placements Midwest International Trade 0.00% 0.87% 100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East International Trade 0.21% 0.11% -48.71%
Interviews Midwest International Trade 0.00% 0.25% 100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements East IP- Trademark/Copyright 0.67% 0.22% -67.61%
Placements Midwest IP- Trademark/Copyright 0.00% 0.72% 100.00%
Placements West IP- Trademark/Copyright 0.67% 0.43% -35.22%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East IP- Trademark/Copyright 1.27% 0.87% -31.62%
Interviews Midwest IP- Trademark/Copyright 0.21% 0.37% 75.84%
Interviews South IP- Trademark/Copyright 0.00% 0.25% 100.00%
Interviews Southwest IP- Trademark/Copyright 0.00% 0.15% 100.00%
Interviews West IP- Trademark/Copyright 0.32% 0.22% -31.62%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements East Labor & Employment 0.67% 1.67% 148.33%
Placements Midwest Labor & Employment 1.34% 0.14% -89.20%
Placements South Labor & Employment 5.37% 1.16% -78.41%
Placements West Labor & Employment 10.07% 3.33% -66.89%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Labor & Employment 2.43% 1.10% -54.64%
Interviews Midwest Labor & Employment 1.27% 0.50% -60.93%
Interviews South Labor & Employment 0.42% 0.38% -10.62%
Interviews Southwest Labor & Employment 0.11% 0.05% -56.04%
Interviews West Labor & Employment 8.35% 1.96% -76.56%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements East Litigation 10.07% 13.19% 31.00%
Placements Midwest Litigation 6.71% 4.57% -31.98%
Placements South Litigation 2.01% 2.75% 36.76%
Placements Southwest Litigation 0.00% 0.17% 100.00%
Placements West Litigation 6.71% 15.51% 131.06%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Litigation 12.26% 16.13% 31.57%
Interviews Midwest Litigation 4.55% 6.49% 42.78%
Interviews South Litigation 1.59% 2.76% 74.27%
Interviews Southwest Litigation 0.74% 0.41% -44.74%
Interviews West Litigation 13.85% 12.38% -10.63%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements East Maritime and Transportation 0.00% 0.43% 100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Maritime and Transportation 0.00% 0.09% 100.00%
Interviews West Maritime and Transportation 0.00% 0.05% 100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements East Municipal Law 0.00% 0.43% 100.00%
Placements West Municipal Law 1.34% 0.00% -100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Municipal Law 0.00% 0.13% 100.00%
Interviews Midwest Municipal Law 0.00% 0.09% 100.00%
Interviews South Municipal Law 0.00% 0.09% 100.00%
Interviews West Municipal Law 0.21% 0.22% 2.57%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements East Other 0.00% 0.65% 100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Other 0.00% 0.28% 100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements East Patent Agents 0.00% 1.74% 100.00%
Placements Midwest Patent Agents 0.67% 0.00% -100.00%
Placements West Patent Agents 0.00% 0.87% 100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Patent Agents 0.53% 0.19% -64.83%
Interviews Midwest Patent Agents 0.42% 0.06% -85.35%
Interviews South Patent Agents 0.11% 0.00% -100.00%
Interviews West Patent Agents 0.74% 0.37% -49.76%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements East Real Estate 0.67% 2.17% 223.91%
Placements Midwest Real Estate 0.67% 0.14% -78.41%
Placements South Real Estate 0.00% 2.17% 100.00%
Placements Southwest Real Estate 0.00% 0.17% 100.00%
Placements West Real Estate 3.36% 0.87% -74.09%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Real Estate 1.69% 2.75% 62.47%
Interviews Midwest Real Estate 0.63% 0.32% -50.18%
Interviews South Real Estate 0.11% 1.39% 1218.77%
Interviews Southwest Real Estate 0.11% 0.22% 111.00%
Interviews West Real Estate 1.59% 1.05% -33.57%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements East Tax 2.01% 1.30% -35.22%
Placements Midwest Tax 0.00% 0.43% 100.00%
Placements South Tax 0.67% 0.43% -35.22%
Placements West Tax 0.67% 0.00% -100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Tax 1.80% 0.70% -61.21%
Interviews Midwest Tax 0.63% 0.68% 7.46%
Interviews South Tax 0.11% 0.43% 310.29%
Interviews Southwest Tax 0.00% 0.19% 100.00%
Interviews West Tax 1.06% 0.22% -78.90%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements East Technology Transactions 0.67% 0.87% 29.57%
Placements West Technology Transactions 0.00% 0.43% 100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Technology Transactions 0.42% 0.73% 72.17%
Interviews Midwest Technology Transactions 0.00% 0.10% 100.00%
Interviews South Technology Transactions 0.11% 0.00% -100.00%
Interviews West Technology Transactions 0.21% 0.19% -12.08%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Telecommunications 0.11% 0.00% -100.00%
Interviews West Telecommunications 0.11% 0.00% -100.00%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Placements East Trust and Estates 0.00% 0.43% 100.00%
Placements Midwest Trust and Estates 0.67% 0.00% -100.00%
Placements South Trust and Estates 0.00% 0.43% 100.00%
Placements West Trust and Estates 0.67% 0.87% 29.57%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Trust and Estates 0.11% 1.18% 1013.63%
Interviews Midwest Trust and Estates 0.74% 0.31% -58.13%
Interviews South Trust and Estates 0.11% 0.43% 310.29%
Interviews Southwest Trust and Estates 0.11% 0.00% -100.00%
Interviews West Trust and Estates 1.27% 0.74% -41.39%
 
Status Region Practice Area 2019 2020 % of Growth
Interviews East Workers Compensation 0.00% 0.03% 100.00%
Interviews Midwest Workers Compensation 0.00% 0.23% 100.00%
Interviews Southwest Workers Compensation 0.00% 0.19% 100.00%
Interviews West Workers Compensation 0.00% 0.05% 100.00%
 TOP
 
Status Practice Area firm_location Region 2019 2020
Interviews Alcohol Beverage Law District of Columbia East 0.00% 0.02%
Interviews Antitrust and Competition California - Los Angeles - Westside West 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Antitrust and Competition California - Orange County West 0.00% 0.03%
Interviews Antitrust and Competition California - San Diego West 0.21% 0.00%
Interviews Antitrust and Competition California - San Francisco West 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Antitrust and Competition California - Silicon Valley/San Jose West 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Antitrust and Competition District of Columbia East 0.11% 0.09%
Interviews Antitrust and Competition Massachusetts - Boston East 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Antitrust and Competition New York - New York City East 0.00% 0.37%
Interviews Antitrust and Competition Rhode Island East 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Banking and Finance California - Los Angeles - Downtown West 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Banking and Finance California - Los Angeles - Westside West 0.00% 0.13%
Interviews Banking and Finance California - San Francisco West 0.11% 0.09%
Interviews Banking and Finance California - Silicon Valley/San Jose West 0.11% 0.09%
Interviews Banking and Finance Colorado - Denver Midwest 0.21% 0.00%
Interviews Banking and Finance District of Columbia East 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Banking and Finance Georgia - Atlanta South 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Banking and Finance Illinois - Chicago Midwest 0.32% 0.00%
Interviews Banking and Finance Massachusetts - Boston East 0.00% 0.28%
Interviews Banking and Finance Massachusetts - Other East 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Banking and Finance Minnesota - Minneapolis/St. Paul Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Banking and Finance Nebraska - Omaha Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Banking and Finance Nevada - Las Vegas Southwest 0.00% 0.08%
Interviews Banking and Finance New Jersey - Northern East 0.00% 0.14%
Interviews Banking and Finance New York - Long Island East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Banking and Finance New York - New York City East 1.06% 0.81%
Interviews Banking and Finance New York - White Plains/Westchester East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Banking and Finance North Carolina - Charlotte East 0.11% 0.37%
Interviews Banking and Finance Ohio - Cleveland Midwest 0.11% 0.06%
Interviews Banking and Finance Pennsylvania - Philadelphia East 0.42% 0.00%
Interviews Banking and Finance Texas - Austin South 0.00% 0.28%
Interviews Banking and Finance Texas - Dallas-Ft.Worth South 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Banking and Finance Texas - Houston South 0.11% 0.09%
Interviews Banking and Finance Virginia - Northern East 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Banking and Finance Virginia - Other East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Banking and Finance Washington - Seattle West 0.11% 0.09%
Interviews Bankruptcy California - Los Angeles West 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Bankruptcy California - Los Angeles - Downtown West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Bankruptcy California - Los Angeles - Westside West 0.21% 0.00%
Interviews Bankruptcy California - Orange County West 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Bankruptcy California - Sacramento West 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Bankruptcy California - San Diego West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Bankruptcy California - San Francisco West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Bankruptcy California - Silicon Valley/San Jose West 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Bankruptcy Colorado - Denver Midwest 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Bankruptcy Delaware - Wilmington East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Bankruptcy District of Columbia East 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Bankruptcy Florida - Orlando East 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Bankruptcy Maryland - Baltimore East 0.00% 0.23%
Interviews Bankruptcy Maryland - Other East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Bankruptcy Michigan - Other Midwest 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Bankruptcy Nevada - Las Vegas Southwest 0.00% 0.05%
Interviews Bankruptcy New Jersey - Northern East 0.00% 0.23%
Interviews Bankruptcy New York - New York City East 0.00% 1.18%
Interviews Bankruptcy North Carolina - Research Triangle East 0.00% 0.28%
Interviews Bankruptcy Oregon - Portland West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Bankruptcy Texas - Austin South 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Bankruptcy Texas - Dallas-Ft.Worth South 0.00% 0.37%
Interviews Bankruptcy Texas - Houston South 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Bankruptcy Virginia - Northern East 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Construction Arizona - Phoenix Southwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Construction California - Los Angeles West 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Construction California - Los Angeles - Downtown West 0.11% 0.06%
Interviews Construction California - Los Angeles - Westside West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Construction California - Orange County West 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Construction California - San Francisco West 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Construction Colorado - Denver Midwest 0.32% 0.00%
Interviews Construction Florida - Miami East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Construction Florida - Orlando East 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Construction Maryland - Baltimore East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Construction New Jersey - Northern East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Construction New York - New York City East 0.32% 0.09%
Interviews Construction Ohio - Cincinnati Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Construction Ohio - Cleveland Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Construction Pennsylvania - Other East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Construction Tennessee - Nashville South 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Construction Utah Southwest 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Construction Virginia - Northern East 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Corporate Arizona - Phoenix Southwest 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Corporate California - Los Angeles West 0.32% 0.06%
Interviews Corporate California - Los Angeles - Downtown West 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Corporate California - Los Angeles - Westside West 0.63% 0.32%
Interviews Corporate California - Orange County West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Corporate California - Other West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Corporate California - Sacramento West 0.11% 0.06%
Interviews Corporate California - San Diego West 0.11% 0.19%
Interviews Corporate California - San Francisco West 1.06% 0.19%
Interviews Corporate California - Silicon Valley/San Jose West 0.53% 0.28%
Interviews Corporate Colorado - Denver Midwest 0.32% 0.53%
Interviews Corporate Colorado - Other Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Corporate District of Columbia East 0.63% 0.46%
Interviews Corporate Florida - Miami East 0.63% 0.09%
Interviews Corporate Florida - Other East 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Corporate Florida - Tampa East 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Corporate Florida - West Palm Beach/Ft. Lauderdale East 0.42% 0.00%
Interviews Corporate Georgia - Atlanta South 0.11% 0.43%
Interviews Corporate Hawaii Southwest 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Corporate Illinois - Chicago Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Corporate Louisiana - New Orleans South 0.00% 0.15%
Interviews Corporate Maryland - Baltimore East 0.21% 0.00%
Interviews Corporate Maryland - Other East 0.11% 0.19%
Interviews Corporate Massachusetts - Boston East 0.85% 0.28%
Interviews Corporate Massachusetts - Other East 0.00% 0.15%
Interviews Corporate Michigan - Detroit Midwest 0.11% 0.06%
Interviews Corporate Michigan - Grand Rapids Midwest 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Corporate Minnesota - Minneapolis/St. Paul Midwest 1.16% 0.19%
Interviews Corporate Missouri - St. Louis Midwest 0.11% 0.13%
Interviews Corporate Nevada - Las Vegas Southwest 0.00% 0.04%
Interviews Corporate New Jersey - Northern East 0.21% 0.14%
Interviews Corporate New York - Albany East 0.00% 0.25%
Interviews Corporate New York - Long Island East 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Corporate New York - New York City East 3.59% 2.14%
Interviews Corporate New York - White Plains/Westchester East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Corporate North Carolina - Charlotte East 0.32% 0.00%
Interviews Corporate North Dakota Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Corporate Ohio - Cleveland Midwest 0.11% 0.06%
Interviews Corporate Ohio - Other Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Corporate Ohio - Toledo Midwest 0.11% 0.19%
Interviews Corporate Oregon - Portland West 0.21% 0.00%
Interviews Corporate Pennsylvania - Pittsburgh East 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Corporate South Carolina - Other South 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Corporate Texas - Austin South 0.00% 0.28%
Interviews Corporate Texas - Dallas-Ft.Worth South 0.21% 0.28%
Interviews Corporate Texas - Houston South 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Corporate Utah Southwest 0.21% 0.00%
Interviews Corporate Virginia - Northern East 0.21% 0.00%
Interviews Corporate Virginia - Other East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Corporate Washington West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Corporate Washington - Seattle West 0.21% 0.19%
Interviews Data Privacy California - Los Angeles - Westside West 0.21% 0.00%
Interviews Data Privacy California - Orange County West 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Data Privacy California - San Francisco West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Data Privacy California - Silicon Valley/San Jose West 0.11% 0.28%
Interviews Data Privacy Colorado - Other Midwest 0.00% 0.03%
Interviews Data Privacy Massachusetts - Boston East 0.00% 0.12%
Interviews Data Privacy Missouri - St. Louis Midwest 0.00% 0.04%
Interviews Data Privacy New Jersey - Northern East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Data Privacy New York - New York City East 0.00% 0.28%
Interviews Data Privacy Ohio - Cincinnati Midwest 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Data Privacy Tennessee - Nashville South 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Data Privacy Utah Southwest 0.00% 0.03%
Interviews Data Privacy Washington - Seattle West 0.21% 0.28%
Interviews Education Arizona - Phoenix Southwest 0.00% 0.05%
Interviews Education California - Los Angeles - Westside West 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Education California - Other West 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Education California - San Francisco West 0.21% 0.06%
Interviews Education California - Silicon Valley/San Jose West 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Education District of Columbia East 0.00% 0.02%
Interviews Education Massachusetts - Boston East 0.11% 0.19%
Interviews Education Massachusetts - Other East 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Education New Jersey - Northern East 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Education New York - Long Island East 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Education New York - New York City East 0.21% 0.00%
Interviews Electric Power New York - New York City East 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Energy and Oil & Gas Arizona - Phoenix Southwest 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Energy and Oil & Gas California - San Francisco West 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Energy and Oil & Gas Colorado - Denver Midwest 0.11% 0.06%
Interviews Energy and Oil & Gas Colorado - Other Midwest 0.00% 0.03%
Interviews Energy and Oil & Gas Michigan - Grand Rapids Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Energy and Oil & Gas New York - Albany East 0.11% 0.09%
Interviews Energy and Oil & Gas New York - New York City East 0.00% 0.25%
Interviews Energy and Oil & Gas Ohio - Columbus Midwest 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Energy and Oil & Gas Texas - Dallas-Ft.Worth South 0.11% 0.09%
Interviews Energy and Oil & Gas Texas - Houston South 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Energy and Oil & Gas West Virginia East 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Entertainment and New Media California - Los Angeles - Westside West 0.32% 0.74%
Interviews Entertainment and New Media District of Columbia East 0.00% 0.02%
Interviews Entertainment and New Media Georgia - Atlanta South 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Entertainment and New Media Louisiana - New Orleans South 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Entertainment and New Media Missouri - St. Louis Midwest 0.00% 0.04%
Interviews Entertainment and New Media New York - New York City East 0.11% 0.09%
Interviews Entertainment and New Media Texas - Dallas-Ft.Worth South 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Entertainment and New Media Texas - Houston South 0.00% 0.04%
Interviews Environmental and Land Use California - Los Angeles - Downtown West 0.21% 0.00%
Interviews Environmental and Land Use California - Los Angeles - Westside West 0.11% 0.13%
Interviews Environmental and Land Use California - Oakland/East Bay West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Environmental and Land Use California - Sacramento West 0.00% 0.31%
Interviews Environmental and Land Use California - San Francisco West 0.53% 0.00%
Interviews Environmental and Land Use California - Silicon Valley/San Jose West 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Environmental and Land Use District of Columbia East 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Environmental and Land Use Florida - Other East 0.00% 0.04%
Interviews Environmental and Land Use Massachusetts - Boston East 0.21% 0.19%
Interviews Environmental and Land Use Michigan - Grand Rapids Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Environmental and Land Use New Jersey - Northern East 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Environmental and Land Use New Jersey - Other East 0.21% 0.00%
Interviews Environmental and Land Use New York - Albany East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Environmental and Land Use New York - New York City East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Environmental and Land Use New York - Rochester East 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Environmental and Land Use New York - Syracuse East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Environmental and Land Use Ohio - Cleveland Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Environmental and Land Use Ohio - Other Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Environmental and Land Use Oregon - Portland West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Environmental and Land Use Texas - Houston South 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Environmental and Land Use Washington - Seattle West 0.32% 0.00%
Interviews ERISA/Executive Compensation California - Other West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews ERISA/Executive Compensation California - San Francisco West 0.21% 0.09%
Interviews ERISA/Executive Compensation California - Silicon Valley/San Jose West 0.11% 0.19%
Interviews ERISA/Executive Compensation Connecticut - Hartford East 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews ERISA/Executive Compensation District of Columbia East 0.11% 0.06%
Interviews ERISA/Executive Compensation Georgia - Atlanta South 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews ERISA/Executive Compensation Kansas Midwest 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews ERISA/Executive Compensation Maryland - Baltimore East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews ERISA/Executive Compensation Missouri - Kansas City Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews ERISA/Executive Compensation New York - New York City East 0.21% 0.19%
Interviews ERISA/Executive Compensation Washington - Seattle West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Family Law California - Los Angeles West 0.11% 0.06%
Interviews Family Law Colorado - Denver Midwest 0.00% 0.34%
Interviews Family Law District of Columbia East 0.00% 0.08%
Interviews Family Law Florida - West Palm Beach/Ft. Lauderdale East 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Family Law Maryland - Baltimore East 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Family Law New Jersey - Other East 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Family Law New York - Long Island East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Family Law North Carolina - Other East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Family Law Ohio - Columbus Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Family Law Tennessee - Nashville South 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Family Law Texas - Austin South 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Family Law Utah Southwest 0.00% 0.03%
Interviews Family Law Wisconsin - Milwaukee Midwest 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Food & Drug Administration Arizona - Phoenix Southwest 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Food & Drug Administration District of Columbia East 0.00% 0.48%
Interviews Food & Drug Administration Georgia - Atlanta South 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Food & Drug Administration Texas - Dallas-Ft.Worth South 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Government and Government Relations California - Los Angeles - Westside West 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Government and Government Relations California - Orange County West 0.00% 0.03%
Interviews Government and Government Relations California - Other West 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Government and Government Relations District of Columbia East 0.00% 0.24%
Interviews Government and Government Relations Florida - Other East 0.00% 0.04%
Interviews Government and Government Relations Georgia - Atlanta South 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Government and Government Relations Massachusetts - Boston East 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Government Contracts California - Los Angeles West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Government Contracts California - Sacramento West 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Government Contracts District of Columbia East 0.11% 0.06%
Interviews Government Contracts Virginia - Northern East 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Healthcare Arizona - Phoenix Southwest 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Healthcare California - Los Angeles West 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Healthcare California - Los Angeles - Westside West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Healthcare California - Orange County West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Healthcare California - Other West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Healthcare California - San Francisco West 0.32% 0.00%
Interviews Healthcare District of Columbia East 0.11% 0.19%
Interviews Healthcare Florida - Tampa East 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Healthcare Georgia - Atlanta South 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Healthcare Illinois - Chicago Midwest 0.53% 0.00%
Interviews Healthcare Massachusetts - Boston East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Healthcare Minnesota - Minneapolis/St. Paul Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Healthcare New York - New York City East 0.00% 0.28%
Interviews Healthcare Ohio - Cleveland Midwest 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Healthcare Texas - Houston South 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Healthcare Texas - Other South 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Immigration California - Los Angeles West 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Immigration California - Orange County West 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Immigration California - Silicon Valley/San Jose West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Immigration Michigan - Other Midwest 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Immigration Missouri - St. Louis Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Immigration New York - Long Island East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Immigration New York - New York City East 0.00% 0.03%
Interviews Immigration Ohio - Columbus Midwest 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Immigration Utah Southwest 0.00% 0.03%
Interviews Insurance Coverage California - Los Angeles West 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Insurance Coverage California - Los Angeles - Westside West 0.11% 0.09%
Interviews Insurance Coverage California - Orange County West 0.00% 0.15%
Interviews Insurance Coverage Colorado - Denver Midwest 0.11% 0.06%
Interviews Insurance Coverage District of Columbia East 0.00% 0.02%
Interviews Insurance Coverage Florida - Miami East 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Insurance Coverage Florida - Tampa East 0.00% 0.05%
Interviews Insurance Coverage Illinois - Chicago Midwest 0.21% 0.14%
Interviews Insurance Coverage Massachusetts - Boston East 0.00% 0.22%
Interviews Insurance Coverage Nevada - Las Vegas Southwest 0.00% 0.05%
Interviews Insurance Coverage New York - New York City East 0.11% 0.15%
Interviews Insurance Coverage Oregon - Portland West 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Insurance Coverage Texas - Houston South 0.00% 0.04%
Interviews Insurance Coverage Washington - Seattle West 0.21% 0.00%
Interviews Insurance Defense Arizona - Phoenix Southwest 0.21% 0.05%
Interviews Insurance Defense California - Los Angeles West 0.42% 0.15%
Interviews Insurance Defense California - Los Angeles - Westside West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Insurance Defense California - Orange County West 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Insurance Defense California - San Francisco West 0.11% 0.05%
Interviews Insurance Defense California - Silicon Valley/San Jose West 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Insurance Defense Colorado - Denver Midwest 0.11% 0.22%
Interviews Insurance Defense Colorado - Other Midwest 0.00% 0.03%
Interviews Insurance Defense District of Columbia East 0.11% 0.02%
Interviews Insurance Defense Florida - Miami East 0.11% 0.19%
Interviews Insurance Defense Florida - Tampa East 0.11% 0.05%
Interviews Insurance Defense Florida - West Palm Beach/Ft. Lauderdale East 0.63% 0.09%
Interviews Insurance Defense Illinois - Chicago Midwest 0.11% 0.14%
Interviews Insurance Defense Maryland - Baltimore East 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Insurance Defense Michigan - Detroit Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Insurance Defense Michigan - Other Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Insurance Defense Missouri - St. Louis Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Insurance Defense Nevada - Las Vegas Southwest 0.00% 0.13%
Interviews Insurance Defense New York - New York City East 0.74% 0.25%
Interviews Insurance Defense New York - White Plains/Westchester East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Insurance Defense Ohio - Cleveland Midwest 0.11% 0.09%
Interviews Insurance Defense Oregon - Portland West 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Insurance Defense Pennsylvania - Philadelphia East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Insurance Defense Pennsylvania - Pittsburgh East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Insurance Defense Texas - Houston South 0.11% 0.13%
Interviews Insurance Defense Virginia - Richmond East 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Insurance Defense Washington - Seattle West 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Insurance Defense Wisconsin - Milwaukee Midwest 0.21% 0.00%
Interviews Intellectual Property California - Orange County West 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Intellectual Property Colorado - Denver Midwest 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Intellectual Property Georgia - Atlanta South 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Intellectual Property Illinois - Chicago Midwest 0.00% 0.22%
Interviews Intellectual Property New Jersey - Northern East 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Intellectual Property Utah Southwest 0.00% 0.03%
Interviews Intellectual Property Virginia - Northern East 0.00% 0.42%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Litigation California - Los Angeles West 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Litigation California - Los Angeles - Downtown West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Litigation California - Oakland/East Bay West 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Litigation California - Orange County West 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Litigation California - San Francisco West 0.53% 0.37%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Litigation California - Silicon Valley/San Jose West 0.42% 0.15%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Litigation Delaware - Wilmington East 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Litigation District of Columbia East 0.53% 0.20%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Litigation Illinois - Chicago Midwest 0.42% 0.25%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Litigation Massachusetts - Boston East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Litigation Minnesota - Minneapolis/St. Paul Midwest 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Litigation New Jersey - Northern East 0.11% 0.06%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Litigation New York - New York City East 0.42% 0.25%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Litigation New York - White Plains/Westchester East 0.00% 0.28%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Litigation Ohio - Cincinnati Midwest 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Litigation Pennsylvania - Philadelphia East 0.21% 0.09%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Litigation Texas - Dallas-Ft.Worth South 0.11% 0.19%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Litigation Utah Southwest 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Litigation Virginia - Northern East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Litigation Washington - Seattle West 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Litigation Wisconsin - Other Midwest 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution Alabama South 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution California - Los Angeles - Downtown West 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution California - Los Angeles - Westside West 0.32% 0.19%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution California - San Francisco West 0.21% 0.00%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution California - Silicon Valley/San Jose West 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution Colorado - Denver Midwest 0.11% 0.28%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution Connecticut - Other East 0.11% 0.19%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution District of Columbia East 0.53% 0.88%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution Illinois - Chicago Midwest 0.63% 0.06%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution Indiana - Indianapolis Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution Massachusetts - Boston East 0.21% 0.37%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution Massachusetts - Other East 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution Michigan - Detroit Midwest 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution Michigan - Grand Rapids Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution Michigan - Other Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution Minnesota - Minneapolis/St. Paul Midwest 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution Missouri - Kansas City Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution New Jersey - Northern East 0.21% 0.00%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution New Jersey - Other East 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution New York - New York City East 0.21% 0.37%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution North Carolina - Research Triangle East 0.11% 0.09%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution Ohio - Cincinnati Midwest 0.11% 0.06%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution Ohio - Cleveland Midwest 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution Pennsylvania - Philadelphia East 0.32% 0.37%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution Texas - Dallas-Ft.Worth South 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution Utah Southwest 0.42% 0.28%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution Virginia - Northern East 0.21% 1.81%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution Washington - Seattle West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution Wisconsin - Milwaukee Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews International Trade District of Columbia East 0.21% 0.06%
Interviews International Trade Illinois - Chicago Midwest 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews International Trade New York - New York City East 0.00% 0.05%
Interviews International Trade Wisconsin - Madison Midwest 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews IP- Trademark/Copyright California - Oakland/East Bay West 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews IP- Trademark/Copyright California - Orange County West 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews IP- Trademark/Copyright California - San Francisco West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews IP- Trademark/Copyright California - Silicon Valley/San Jose West 0.11% 0.06%
Interviews IP- Trademark/Copyright District of Columbia East 0.42% 0.11%
Interviews IP- Trademark/Copyright Illinois - Chicago Midwest 0.21% 0.06%
Interviews IP- Trademark/Copyright Louisiana - New Orleans South 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews IP- Trademark/Copyright Massachusetts - Boston East 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews IP- Trademark/Copyright Michigan - Detroit Midwest 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews IP- Trademark/Copyright New York - Albany East 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews IP- Trademark/Copyright New York - New York City East 0.63% 0.09%
Interviews IP- Trademark/Copyright New York - White Plains/Westchester East 0.11% 0.28%
Interviews IP- Trademark/Copyright North Carolina - Charlotte East 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews IP- Trademark/Copyright North Carolina - Research Triangle East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews IP- Trademark/Copyright Ohio - Cincinnati Midwest 0.00% 0.15%
Interviews IP- Trademark/Copyright Ohio - Cleveland Midwest 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews IP- Trademark/Copyright Texas - Austin South 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews IP- Trademark/Copyright Utah Southwest 0.00% 0.15%
Interviews IP- Trademark/Copyright Virginia - Northern East 0.00% 0.05%
Interviews IP- Trademark/Copyright Washington - Seattle West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Labor & Employment Alabama South 0.11% 0.19%
Interviews Labor & Employment Arizona - Phoenix Southwest 0.11% 0.05%
Interviews Labor & Employment California - Los Angeles West 1.37% 0.34%
Interviews Labor & Employment California - Los Angeles - Downtown West 1.48% 0.28%
Interviews Labor & Employment California - Los Angeles - Westside West 1.69% 0.13%
Interviews Labor & Employment California - Oakland/East Bay West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Labor & Employment California - Orange County West 0.53% 0.00%
Interviews Labor & Employment California - Other West 0.32% 0.25%
Interviews Labor & Employment California - Sacramento West 0.42% 0.19%
Interviews Labor & Employment California - San Diego West 0.42% 0.09%
Interviews Labor & Employment California - San Francisco West 1.59% 0.50%
Interviews Labor & Employment California - Silicon Valley/San Jose West 0.32% 0.00%
Interviews Labor & Employment Colorado - Denver Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Labor & Employment Colorado - Other Midwest 0.00% 0.03%
Interviews Labor & Employment District of Columbia East 0.21% 0.27%
Interviews Labor & Employment Florida - Tampa East 0.00% 0.05%
Interviews Labor & Employment Georgia - Atlanta South 0.32% 0.06%
Interviews Labor & Employment Idaho West 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Labor & Employment Illinois - Chicago Midwest 0.21% 0.00%
Interviews Labor & Employment Kansas Midwest 0.11% 0.09%
Interviews Labor & Employment Maryland - Baltimore East 0.11% 0.14%
Interviews Labor & Employment Massachusetts - Boston East 0.21% 0.00%
Interviews Labor & Employment Massachusetts - Other East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Labor & Employment Michigan - Detroit Midwest 0.32% 0.00%
Interviews Labor & Employment Michigan - Grand Rapids Midwest 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Labor & Employment Missouri - St. Louis Midwest 0.21% 0.00%
Interviews Labor & Employment New Jersey - Northern East 0.21% 0.00%
Interviews Labor & Employment New York - Long Island East 0.32% 0.06%
Interviews Labor & Employment New York - New York City East 0.74% 0.22%
Interviews Labor & Employment Ohio - Akron Midwest 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Labor & Employment Ohio - Cleveland Midwest 0.21% 0.00%
Interviews Labor & Employment Ohio - Columbus Midwest 0.11% 0.19%
Interviews Labor & Employment Pennsylvania - Other East 0.11% 0.09%
Interviews Labor & Employment Pennsylvania - Philadelphia East 0.11% 0.19%
Interviews Labor & Employment Pennsylvania - Pittsburgh East 0.21% 0.00%
Interviews Labor & Employment Texas - Dallas-Ft.Worth South 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Labor & Employment Texas - Houston South 0.00% 0.04%
Interviews Labor & Employment Virginia - Northern East 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Labor & Employment Virginia - Richmond East 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Labor & Employment Washington - Seattle West 0.11% 0.09%
Interviews Litigation Alabama South 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Litigation Arizona - Phoenix Southwest 0.63% 0.05%
Interviews Litigation California - Los Angeles West 1.37% 2.08%
Interviews Litigation California - Los Angeles - Downtown West 1.59% 1.08%
Interviews Litigation California - Los Angeles - Westside West 3.59% 1.67%
Interviews Litigation California - Oakland/East Bay West 0.00% 0.25%
Interviews Litigation California - Orange County West 1.90% 1.12%
Interviews Litigation California - Other West 0.11% 0.62%
Interviews Litigation California - Sacramento West 0.00% 0.43%
Interviews Litigation California - San Diego West 0.85% 0.56%
Interviews Litigation California - San Francisco West 2.64% 2.31%
Interviews Litigation California - Silicon Valley/San Jose West 0.74% 0.53%
Interviews Litigation Colorado - Denver Midwest 0.53% 0.99%
Interviews Litigation Colorado - Other Midwest 0.00% 0.03%
Interviews Litigation Connecticut - Other East 0.00% 0.37%
Interviews Litigation Delaware - Wilmington East 0.63% 0.09%
Interviews Litigation District of Columbia East 1.59% 2.05%
Interviews Litigation Florida - Miami East 1.27% 1.12%
Interviews Litigation Florida - Orlando East 0.00% 0.15%
Interviews Litigation Florida - Other East 0.00% 0.04%
Interviews Litigation Florida - Tampa East 0.42% 0.23%
Interviews Litigation Florida - West Palm Beach/Ft. Lauderdale East 0.11% 1.02%
Interviews Litigation Georgia - Atlanta South 0.53% 0.43%
Interviews Litigation Idaho West 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Litigation Illinois - Chicago Midwest 1.37% 3.08%
Interviews Litigation Illinois - Other Midwest 0.21% 0.19%
Interviews Litigation Indiana - Other Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Litigation Iowa Midwest 0.21% 0.00%
Interviews Litigation Kentucky- Other South 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Litigation Louisiana - New Orleans South 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Litigation Maine East 0.11% 0.46%
Interviews Litigation Maryland - Baltimore East 0.00% 0.70%
Interviews Litigation Maryland - Other East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Litigation Massachusetts - Boston East 1.90% 0.37%
Interviews Litigation Massachusetts - Other East 0.11% 0.09%
Interviews Litigation Michigan - Detroit Midwest 0.11% 0.56%
Interviews Litigation Michigan - Grand Rapids Midwest 0.21% 0.09%
Interviews Litigation Michigan - Other Midwest 0.21% 0.09%
Interviews Litigation Minnesota - Minneapolis/St. Paul Midwest 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Litigation Missouri - Kansas City Midwest 0.11% 0.19%
Interviews Litigation Missouri - St. Louis Midwest 0.32% 0.00%
Interviews Litigation Nevada - Las Vegas Southwest 0.00% 0.18%
Interviews Litigation New Jersey - Central East 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Litigation New Jersey - Northern East 0.32% 0.70%
Interviews Litigation New Jersey - Other East 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Litigation New York - Buffalo East 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Litigation New York - Long Island East 0.21% 0.81%
Interviews Litigation New York - New York City East 4.44% 5.70%
Interviews Litigation New York - Other East 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Litigation New York - Rochester East 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Litigation New York - Syracuse East 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Litigation New York - White Plains/Westchester East 0.32% 0.28%
Interviews Litigation North Carolina - Charlotte East 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Litigation North Carolina - Other East 0.11% 0.09%
Interviews Litigation North Carolina - Research Triangle East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Litigation Ohio - Akron Midwest 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Litigation Ohio - Cincinnati Midwest 0.11% 0.19%
Interviews Litigation Ohio - Cleveland Midwest 0.42% 0.46%
Interviews Litigation Ohio - Columbus Midwest 0.11% 0.19%
Interviews Litigation Oregon - Portland West 0.42% 0.25%
Interviews Litigation Oregon- Other West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Litigation Pennsylvania - Other East 0.00% 0.37%
Interviews Litigation Pennsylvania - Philadelphia East 0.32% 0.28%
Interviews Litigation Pennsylvania - Pittsburgh East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Litigation South Dakota Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Litigation Tennessee - Nashville South 0.00% 0.28%
Interviews Litigation Texas - Austin South 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Litigation Texas - Dallas-Ft.Worth South 0.63% 0.71%
Interviews Litigation Texas - Houston South 0.32% 0.59%
Interviews Litigation Texas - San Antonio South 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Litigation Utah Southwest 0.11% 0.19%
Interviews Litigation Virginia - Richmond East 0.21% 0.00%
Interviews Litigation Washington West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Litigation Washington - Seattle West 0.42% 1.39%
Interviews Litigation Wisconsin - Madison Midwest 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Litigation Wisconsin - Milwaukee Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Litigation Wisconsin - Other Midwest 0.32% 0.09%
Interviews Maritime and Transportation California - San Francisco West 0.00% 0.05%
Interviews Maritime and Transportation Florida - Miami East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Municipal Law California - Los Angeles - Downtown West 0.21% 0.06%
Interviews Municipal Law California - Orange County West 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Municipal Law California - Sacramento West 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Municipal Law Florida - Other East 0.00% 0.04%
Interviews Municipal Law Illinois - Chicago Midwest 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Municipal Law New York - White Plains/Westchester East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Municipal Law Texas - Austin South 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Other District of Columbia East 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Other Maryland - Baltimore East 0.00% 0.05%
Interviews Other New York - New York City East 0.00% 0.05%
Interviews Patent Agents California - Los Angeles West 0.11% 0.19%
Interviews Patent Agents California - San Francisco West 0.32% 0.00%
Interviews Patent Agents California - Silicon Valley/San Jose West 0.32% 0.00%
Interviews Patent Agents Colorado - Denver Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Patent Agents District of Columbia East 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Patent Agents Illinois - Chicago Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Patent Agents Missouri - Kansas City Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Patent Agents Missouri - St. Louis Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Patent Agents New Jersey - Northern East 0.21% 0.00%
Interviews Patent Agents North Carolina - Charlotte East 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Patent Agents North Carolina - Research Triangle East 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Patent Agents Ohio - Cleveland Midwest 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Patent Agents Pennsylvania - Other East 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Patent Agents Texas - Dallas-Ft.Worth South 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Patent Agents Washington - Seattle West 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Real Estate Arizona - Phoenix Southwest 0.11% 0.19%
Interviews Real Estate California - Los Angeles West 0.00% 0.12%
Interviews Real Estate California - Los Angeles - Downtown West 0.32% 0.00%
Interviews Real Estate California - Los Angeles - Westside West 0.11% 0.28%
Interviews Real Estate California - Oakland/East Bay West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Real Estate California - Orange County West 0.32% 0.19%
Interviews Real Estate California - Sacramento West 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Real Estate California - San Diego West 0.21% 0.19%
Interviews Real Estate Colorado - Denver Midwest 0.42% 0.06%
Interviews Real Estate Colorado - Other Midwest 0.11% 0.03%
Interviews Real Estate Connecticut - Other East 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Real Estate Florida - Miami East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Real Estate Florida - Orlando East 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Real Estate Florida - Other East 0.00% 0.04%
Interviews Real Estate Florida - Tampa East 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Real Estate Georgia - Atlanta South 0.11% 0.56%
Interviews Real Estate Illinois - Chicago Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Real Estate Louisiana - New Orleans South 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Real Estate Massachusetts - Boston East 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Real Estate Massachusetts - Other East 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Real Estate Missouri - St. Louis Midwest 0.00% 0.04%
Interviews Real Estate Nevada - Las Vegas Southwest 0.00% 0.04%
Interviews Real Estate New Jersey - Northern East 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Real Estate New York - Long Island East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Real Estate New York - New York City East 1.27% 0.98%
Interviews Real Estate New York - Rochester East 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Real Estate New York - Syracuse East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Real Estate New York - White Plains/Westchester East 0.21% 0.09%
Interviews Real Estate North Carolina - Charlotte East 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Real Estate North Carolina - Other East 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Real Estate Ohio - Columbus Midwest 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Real Estate Oregon - Portland West 0.32% 0.00%
Interviews Real Estate Pennsylvania - Pittsburgh East 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Real Estate Texas - Austin South 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Real Estate Texas - Dallas-Ft.Worth South 0.00% 0.56%
Interviews Real Estate Texas - Houston South 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Real Estate Washington West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Real Estate Washington - Seattle West 0.11% 0.09%
Interviews Tax California - Los Angeles - Westside West 0.00% 0.04%
Interviews Tax California - San Diego West 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Tax California - San Francisco West 0.42% 0.09%
Interviews Tax California - Silicon Valley/San Jose West 0.42% 0.00%
Interviews Tax Colorado - Denver Midwest 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Tax District of Columbia East 0.21% 0.19%
Interviews Tax Florida - Jacksonville East 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Tax Florida - Miami East 0.32% 0.28%
Interviews Tax Florida - Orlando East 0.11% 0.09%
Interviews Tax Florida - Other East 0.32% 0.00%
Interviews Tax Georgia - Atlanta South 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Tax Illinois - Chicago Midwest 0.11% 0.19%
Interviews Tax Iowa Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Tax Maryland - Other East 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Tax Massachusetts - Other East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Tax Michigan - Ann Arbor Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Tax Michigan - Detroit Midwest 0.21% 0.06%
Interviews Tax Michigan - Grand Rapids Midwest 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Tax Minnesota - Minneapolis/St. Paul Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Tax Missouri - St. Louis Midwest 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Tax Nebraska - Omaha Midwest 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Tax New York - Long Island East 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Tax New York - New York City East 0.53% 0.05%
Interviews Tax Texas - Austin South 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Tax Texas - Dallas-Ft.Worth South 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Tax Texas - Houston South 0.11% 0.19%
Interviews Tax Utah Southwest 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Tax Washington - Seattle West 0.21% 0.00%
Interviews Technology Transactions California - Los Angeles - Westside West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Technology Transactions California - Silicon Valley/San Jose West 0.11% 0.09%
Interviews Technology Transactions District of Columbia East 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Technology Transactions Georgia - Atlanta South 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Technology Transactions Massachusetts - Boston East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Technology Transactions Missouri - St. Louis Midwest 0.00% 0.04%
Interviews Technology Transactions New Jersey - Northern East 0.00% 0.15%
Interviews Technology Transactions New York - New York City East 0.42% 0.09%
Interviews Technology Transactions Pennsylvania - Philadelphia East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Technology Transactions Virginia - Northern East 0.00% 0.23%
Interviews Technology Transactions Washington - Seattle West 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Technology Transactions Wisconsin - Madison Midwest 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Telecommunications California - San Francisco West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Telecommunications District of Columbia East 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Trust and Estates Arizona - Phoenix Southwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Trust and Estates California - Los Angeles West 0.42% 0.37%
Interviews Trust and Estates California - Los Angeles - Westside West 0.21% 0.09%
Interviews Trust and Estates California - Other West 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Trust and Estates California - San Diego West 0.11% 0.19%
Interviews Trust and Estates California - San Francisco West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Trust and Estates California - Silicon Valley/San Jose West 0.21% 0.00%
Interviews Trust and Estates Florida - Miami East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Trust and Estates Florida - Orlando East 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Trust and Estates Georgia - Atlanta South 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Trust and Estates Illinois - Chicago Midwest 0.42% 0.19%
Interviews Trust and Estates Illinois - Other Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Trust and Estates Iowa Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Trust and Estates Maine East 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Trust and Estates Michigan - Detroit Midwest 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Trust and Estates Michigan - Grand Rapids Midwest 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Trust and Estates Minnesota - Minneapolis/St. Paul Midwest 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Trust and Estates Montana West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Trust and Estates New Hampshire East 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Trust and Estates New York - Albany East 0.00% 0.06%
Interviews Trust and Estates New York - Other East 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Trust and Estates Pennsylvania - Other East 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Trust and Estates Texas - Austin South 0.00% 0.09%
Interviews Trust and Estates Texas - Dallas-Ft.Worth South 0.11% 0.25%
Interviews Trust and Estates Virginia - Northern East 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Trust and Estates Virginia - Richmond East 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Trust and Estates Washington - Seattle West 0.11% 0.00%
Interviews Workers Compensation California - San Francisco West 0.00% 0.05%
Interviews Workers Compensation Illinois - Chicago Midwest 0.00% 0.23%
Interviews Workers Compensation Nevada - Las Vegas Southwest 0.00% 0.19%
Interviews Workers Compensation New York - New York City East 0.00% 0.03%
 TOP

The Top Twenty Reasons the 2020 Legal Market Was So Unique


When the Coronavirus hit initially, most people did not understand what was going on—and neither did I. I expected a normal recession not unlike what we had in the legal market in 2000, 2001, and 2008 through 2011. Here were a few of my grander predictions that I memorialized in a series of videos, articles, and other information.

In this report I am going to break down my top twenty reasons into two sections. Section “A” lists the five reasons that are based on assumptions I have always made in the past, and section “B” explains the fifteen reasons the 2020 legal market was so unique that I did not foresee.
 
  1. Five Assumptions I Have Always Made About Slow Economies Based on Recessions in the Legal Market Between Late 2000, 2001 and 2008-10

Because I have been through so many recessions in the legal market before, I assumed everything would be quite similar this time. With little thought, I looked at history and made the following assumptions:
 
  1. I Assumed That There Would Be Many Layoffs in Larger Law Firms, and Many Smaller Law Firms Would Take Work Away from Larger Firms

During recessions, large law firms typically lay off many people—especially in unprofitable practice areas. They also use the opportunity to get rid of poor performers, attorneys with critical attitudes, and others they might otherwise keep around.
 
Companies also start watching their legal bills more closely during a recession. They are unwilling or unable to write endless checks to large law firms, so they start managing expenses and put off work they might otherwise do. This adversely affects the revenue of law firms.

This Assumption Was Correct
 
  • Larger law firms laid off many people—but not as many as I expected. The largest markets were the worst in terms of layoffs. Smaller law firms are much more isolated from these layoffs.
  • Hiring did pick up at smaller law firms. It picked up far more than I ever could have expected. It became bustling. Many smaller law firms barreled through the recession. They overwhelmed us with "job orders" - requests for attorneys from law firms all over the country. Ordinarily, smaller law firms rarely use recruiters. This year, most of our placements were with smaller to midsize law firms. Larger firms were hiring, but they seemed much more negatively affected by the recession than smaller firms in smaller markets. Smaller law firms enthusiastically used recruiters.
  • Interviewing in Firms of Different Sizes
 TOP
 
Practice Area Interviews in the Largest 200 Firms versus Smaller Firms Percentage of Interviews in by Firm Size 2020
Alcohol Beverage Law Smaller Firms 100.00%
Antitrust and Competition Small to Medium-Sized Firms 100.00%
Bankruptcy Small to Medium-Sized Firms 81.18%
Bankruptcy One of the 200 Largest Firms 18.82%
Construction Small to Medium-Sized Firms 100.00%
Corporate Small to Medium-Sized Firms 63.96%
Corporate One of the 200 Largest Firms 36.04%
Data Privacy Small to Medium-Sized Firms 34.63%
Data Privacy One of the 200 Largest Firms 65.37%
Education Small to Medium-Sized Firms 87.97%
Education One of the 200 Largest Firms 12.03%
Electric Power Small to Medium-Sized Firms 100.00%
Energy and Oil & Gas Small to Medium-Sized Firms 48.28%
Energy and Oil & Gas One of the 200 Largest Firms 51.72%
Entertainment and New Media Small to Medium-Sized Firms 85.41%
Entertainment and New Media One of the 200 Largest Firms 14.59%
Environmental and Land Use Small to Medium-Sized Firms 100.00%
ERISA/Executive Compensation Small to Medium-Sized Firms 100.00%
Family Law Small to Medium-Sized Firms 100.00%
Finance Small to Medium-Sized Firms 52.49%
Finance One of the 200 Largest Firms 47.51%
Food & Drug Administration Small to Medium-Sized Firms 23.91%
Food & Drug Administration One of the 200 Largest Firms 76.09%
Government and Government Relations Small to Medium-Sized Firms 64.65%
Government and Government Relations One of the 200 Largest Firms 35.35%
Government Contracts Small to Medium-Sized Firms 66.67%
Government Contracts One of the 200 Largest Firms 33.33%
Health Care Small to Medium-Sized Firms 40.00%
Health Care One of the 200 Largest Firms 60.00%
Immigration Small to Medium-Sized Firms 72.73%
Immigration One of the 200 Largest Firms 27.27%
Insurance Coverage Small to Medium-Sized Firms 84.99%
Insurance Coverage One of the 200 Largest Firms 15.01%
Insurance Defense Small to Medium-Sized Firms 96.14%
Insurance Defense One of the 200 Largest Firms 3.86%
Intellectual Property - General Small to Medium-Sized Firms 90.77%
Intellectual Property - General One of the 200 Largest Firms 9.23%
Intellectual Property - Litigation Small to Medium-Sized Firms 79.68%
Intellectual Property - Litigation One of the 200 Largest Firms 20.32%
Intellectual Property - Patent Small to Medium-Sized Firms 80.65%
Intellectual Property - Patent One of the 200 Largest Firms 19.35%
Intellectual Property - Trademark/Copyright Small to Medium-Sized Firms 78.33%
Intellectual Property - Trademark/Copyright One of the 200 Largest Firms 21.67%
International Trade Small to Medium-Sized Firms 82.61%
International Trade One of the 200 Largest Firms 17.39%
Labor & Employment Small to Medium-Sized Firms 73.00%
Labor & Employment One of the 200 Largest Firms 27.00%
Litigation Small to Medium-Sized Firms 89.15%
Litigation One of the 200 Largest Firms 10.85%
Maritime and Transportation Small to Medium-Sized Firms 100.00%
Municipal Law Small to Medium-Sized Firms 82.56%
Municipal Law One of the 200 Largest Firms 17.44%
Other Small to Medium-Sized Firms 66.67%
Other One of the 200 Largest Firms 33.33%
Patent Agents/Technical Specialists Small to Medium-Sized Firms 70.00%
Patent Agents/Technical Specialists One of the 200 Largest Firms 30.00%
Real Estate Small to Medium-Sized Firms 77.47%
Real Estate One of the 200 Largest Firms 22.53%
Tax Small to Medium-Sized Firms 86.75%
Tax One of the 200 Largest Firms 13.25%
Technology Transactions Small to Medium-Sized Firms 44.34%
Technology Transactions One of the 200 Largest Firms 55.66%
Trusts and Estates Small to Medium-Sized Firms 90.70%
Trusts and Estates One of the 200 Largest Firms 9.30%
Workers Compensation Small to Medium-Sized Firms 100.00%
 
 TOP
Hiring in Firms of Different Sizes
 
Main Practice Area Placements in the Largest 200 Firms versus Smaller Firms Percentage of Placements in 2020
Antitrust and Competition Smaller Firms 57.14%
Antitrust and Competition One of the 200 Largest Firms 42.86%
Bankruptcy Smaller Firms 78.95%
Bankruptcy One of the 200 Largest Firms 21.05%
Construction Smaller Firms 100.00%
Corporate Smaller Firms 42.80%
Corporate One of the 200 Largest Firms 57.20%
Data Privacy Smaller Firms 7.69%
Data Privacy One of the 200 Largest Firms 92.31%
Education Smaller Firms 50.00%
Education One of the 200 Largest Firms 50.00%
Energy and Oil & Gas Smaller Firms 100.00%
Entertainment and New Media Smaller Firms 100.00%
Environmental and Land Use Smaller Firms 100.00%
ERISA/Executive Compensation Smaller Firms 100.00%
Family Law Smaller Firms 100.00%
Finance Smaller Firms 60.26%
Finance One of the 200 Largest Firms 39.74%
Food & Drug Administration Smaller Firms 40.00%
Food & Drug Administration One of the 200 Largest Firms 60.00%
Government and Government Relations Smaller Firms 100.00%
Health Care Smaller Firms 100.00%
Immigration Smaller Firms 100.00%
Insurance Coverage Smaller Firms 100.00%
Insurance Defense Smaller Firms 100.00%
Intellectual Property - General Smaller Firms 50.00%
Intellectual Property - General One of the 200 Largest Firms 50.00%
Intellectual Property - Litigation Smaller Firms 81.82%
Intellectual Property - Litigation One of the 200 Largest Firms 18.18%
Intellectual Property - Patent Smaller Firms 82.09%
Intellectual Property - Patent One of the 200 Largest Firms 17.91%
Intellectual Property - Trademark/Copyright Smaller Firms 100.00%
International Trade Smaller Firms 100.00%
Labor & Employment Smaller Firms 60.92%
Labor & Employment One of the 200 Largest Firms 39.08%
Litigation Smaller Firms 87.18%
Litigation One of the 200 Largest Firms 12.82%
Maritime and Transportation Smaller Firms 100.00%
Municipal Law Smaller Firms 100.00%
Other Smaller Firms 33.33%
Other One of the 200 Largest Firms 66.67%
Patent Agents/Technical Specialists Smaller Firms 66.67%
Patent Agents/Technical Specialists One of the 200 Largest Firms 33.33%
Real Estate Smaller Firms 100.00%
Tax Smaller Firms 40.00%
Tax One of the 200 Largest Firms 60.00%
Technology Transactions Smaller Firms 33.33%
Technology Transactions One of the 200 Largest Firms 66.67%
Trusts and Estates Smaller Firms 100.00%
 
 TOP
What This Means for Law Firms and Your Legal Career
 
  • Smaller law firms should hire more attorneys now if they have the work. Small law firms have an unprecedented opportunity to grow in 2021 if they can increase work from their largest clients and attract clients from larger firms.
  • Attorneys and law students should seriously consider smaller law firms. You have a great opportunity to get positions with these firms in 2021. There is more hiring than ever before. They have an opportunity to go somewhere they can build a book of business early in their career if they want.
 
  1. I Assumed That Work Would Slow Down in Major Markets For Lateral Attorneys and Get Busier in Smaller Markets

Because their billing rates are lower and the need for legal work does not stop because of recessions, companies send work to smaller, less expensive law firms–often in smaller markets.

This Assumption Was Correct
 
  • Smaller markets were busier than I have ever seen them in my career. Smaller markets were massive sources of business. We have never made so many placements in smaller markets—rural Wisconsin, Reno, Arkansas, Alabama, West Texas—you name it. These smaller markets were active and hungry for talent. In some small markets, cities of 10,000 or less than you have never heard of, our candidates were getting multiple interviews. This stunned us.
 
Status Practice Area Firm Locations Region 2019 2020
Placements Antitrust and Competition California - Orange County West 0.00% 0.14%
Placements Antitrust and Competition Florida - Tampa East 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Antitrust and Competition Washington - Seattle West 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Banking and Finance California - Silicon Valley/San Jose West 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Banking and Finance Georgia - Atlanta South 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Banking and Finance Massachusetts - Boston East 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Banking and Finance Nevada - Las Vegas Southwest 0.00% 0.17%
Placements Banking and Finance New Jersey - Northern East 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Banking and Finance New York - New York City East 0.67% 1.74%
Placements Banking and Finance New York - White Plains/Westchester East 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Banking and Finance North Carolina - Charlotte East 0.67% 0.87%
Placements Banking and Finance Ohio - Cleveland Midwest 0.67% 0.29%
Placements Banking and Finance Pennsylvania - Philadelphia East 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Banking and Finance Texas - Houston South 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Bankruptcy District of Columbia East 0.00% 0.22%
Placements Bankruptcy Maryland - Baltimore East 0.00% 0.87%
Placements Bankruptcy Massachusetts - Boston East 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Bankruptcy North Carolina - Other East 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Bankruptcy Texas - Dallas-Ft.Worth South 0.00% 1.74%
Placements Bankruptcy Virginia - Northern East 0.00% 0.87%
Placements Construction California - Orange County West 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Construction Colorado - Denver Midwest 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Construction New York - New York City East 1.34% 0.00%
Placements Corporate Arizona - Phoenix Southwest 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Corporate California - Los Angeles West 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Corporate California - Los Angeles - Westside West 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Corporate California - Orange County West 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Corporate California - Silicon Valley/San Jose West 2.01% 0.43%
Placements Corporate Colorado - Denver Midwest 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Corporate Connecticut - Hartford East 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Corporate Florida - Miami East 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Corporate Georgia - Atlanta South 0.00% 0.87%
Placements Corporate Maryland - Other East 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Corporate Massachusetts - Boston East 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Corporate Minnesota - Minneapolis/St. Paul Midwest 2.01% 0.00%
Placements Corporate Missouri - St. Louis Midwest 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Corporate Nevada - Las Vegas Southwest 0.00% 0.17%
Placements Corporate New Jersey - Northern East 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Corporate New York - New York City East 4.70% 2.61%
Placements Corporate North Carolina - Charlotte East 0.00% 0.87%
Placements Corporate Ohio - Cleveland Midwest 0.00% 0.29%
Placements Corporate South Carolina - Other South 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Corporate Texas - Dallas-Ft.Worth South 0.00% 0.29%
Placements Data Privacy California - Los Angeles - Westside West 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Data Privacy California - San Francisco West 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Data Privacy Colorado - Other Midwest 0.00% 0.14%
Placements Data Privacy Washington - Seattle West 0.00% 1.74%
Placements Education California - Los Angeles West 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Education California - Other West 0.00% 0.29%
Placements Education New York - Long Island East 0.00% 0.29%
Placements Energy and Oil & Gas California - Los Angeles - Westside West 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Energy and Oil & Gas Colorado - Denver Midwest 0.00% 0.22%
Placements Energy and Oil & Gas Colorado - Other Midwest 0.00% 0.14%
Placements Energy and Oil & Gas Texas - Dallas-Ft.Worth South 0.00% 0.29%
Placements Entertainment and New Media California - Los Angeles - Westside West 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Entertainment and New Media Texas - Austin South 0.00% 0.29%
Placements Environmental and Land Use California - San Francisco West 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Environmental and Land Use Colorado - Denver Midwest 0.00% 0.22%
Placements Environmental and Land Use New York - Rochester East 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Environmental and Land Use Oregon - Portland West 0.00% 0.87%
Placements ERISA/Executive Compensation California - San Francisco West 0.67% 0.00%
Placements ERISA/Executive Compensation District of Columbia East 0.00% 0.29%
Placements ERISA/Executive Compensation Maryland - Baltimore East 0.00% 0.43%
Placements ERISA/Executive Compensation Missouri - Kansas City Midwest 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Family Law Colorado - Denver Midwest 0.00% 1.16%
Placements Family Law District of Columbia East 0.00% 0.87%
Placements Family Law Florida - Miami East 0.00% 0.87%
Placements Family Law New Jersey - Northern East 0.00% 0.87%
Placements Food & Drug Administration District of Columbia East 0.00% 1.74%
Placements Food & Drug Administration Georgia - Atlanta South 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Government and Government Relations California - Orange County West 0.00% 0.14%
Placements Healthcare California - Orange County West 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Healthcare California - Other West 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Healthcare Ohio - Cleveland Midwest 0.00% 0.29%
Placements Immigration California - Orange County West 0.00% 0.87%
Placements Immigration Missouri - St. Louis Midwest 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Insurance Coverage California - Los Angeles - Westside West 0.67% 0.43%
Placements Insurance Coverage California - Other West 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Insurance Coverage Illinois - Chicago Midwest 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Insurance Defense California - Los Angeles West 1.34% 0.00%
Placements Insurance Defense Colorado - Denver Midwest 0.00% 0.51%
Placements Insurance Defense Colorado - Other Midwest 0.00% 0.14%
Placements Insurance Defense Florida - Miami East 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Insurance Defense Florida - West Palm Beach/Ft. Lauderdale East 1.34% 0.00%
Placements Insurance Defense Georgia - Atlanta South 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Insurance Defense Maryland - Baltimore East 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Insurance Defense Nevada - Las Vegas Southwest 0.00% 0.17%
Placements Insurance Defense New York - Long Island East 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Insurance Defense New York - New York City East 1.34% 0.00%
Placements Insurance Defense Texas - Houston South 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Insurance Defense Washington - Seattle West 0.00% 0.87%
Placements Intellectual Property California - Orange County West 0.00% 0.14%
Placements Intellectual Property Georgia - Atlanta South 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Intellectual Property Illinois - Chicago Midwest 0.00% 0.29%
Placements Intellectual Property - Litigation California - Orange County West 0.00% 0.14%
Placements Intellectual Property - Litigation California - San Francisco West 0.00% 0.29%
Placements Intellectual Property - Litigation Delaware - Wilmington East 0.00% 0.87%
Placements Intellectual Property - Litigation District of Columbia East 0.67% 0.22%
Placements Intellectual Property - Litigation Massachusetts - Boston East 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Intellectual Property - Litigation New York - New York City East 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Intellectual Property - Litigation New York - White Plains/Westchester East 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Intellectual Property - Litigation Wisconsin - Other Midwest 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution California - Silicon Valley/San Jose West 0.00% 0.87%
Placements Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution District of Columbia East 1.34% 1.09%
Placements Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution Illinois - Chicago Midwest 0.00% 0.29%
Placements Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution Michigan - Grand Rapids Midwest 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution New Jersey - Northern East 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution New York - Long Island East 0.00% 0.87%
Placements Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution Pennsylvania - Philadelphia East 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution Utah Southwest 0.00% 0.87%
Placements Intellectual Property - Patent Prosecution Virginia - Northern East 0.00% 0.43%
Placements International Trade District of Columbia East 0.67% 0.00%
Placements International Trade Illinois - Chicago Midwest 0.00% 0.87%
Placements IP- Trademark/Copyright California - Orange County West 0.00% 0.14%
Placements IP- Trademark/Copyright California - San Francisco West 0.00% 0.29%
Placements IP- Trademark/Copyright California - Silicon Valley/San Jose West 0.67% 0.00%
Placements IP- Trademark/Copyright District of Columbia East 0.00% 0.22%
Placements IP- Trademark/Copyright Illinois - Chicago Midwest 0.00% 0.29%
Placements IP- Trademark/Copyright Michigan - Grand Rapids Midwest 0.00% 0.43%
Placements IP- Trademark/Copyright North Carolina - Charlotte East 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Labor & Employment Alabama South 0.00% 0.87%
Placements Labor & Employment California - Los Angeles West 1.34% 0.43%
Placements Labor & Employment California - Los Angeles - Downtown West 2.01% 0.00%
Placements Labor & Employment California - Los Angeles - Westside West 2.68% 0.00%
Placements Labor & Employment California - Oakland/East Bay West 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Labor & Employment California - Other West 0.00% 0.72%
Placements Labor & Employment California - Sacramento West 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Labor & Employment California - San Diego West 1.34% 0.00%
Placements Labor & Employment California - San Francisco West 2.01% 1.30%
Placements Labor & Employment Colorado - Other Midwest 0.00% 0.14%
Placements Labor & Employment District of Columbia East 0.00% 0.94%
Placements Labor & Employment Georgia - Atlanta South 4.70% 0.00%
Placements Labor & Employment Idaho West 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Labor & Employment Illinois - Chicago Midwest 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Labor & Employment Maryland - Baltimore East 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Labor & Employment New Jersey - Northern East 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Labor & Employment New York - Long Island East 0.00% 0.29%
Placements Labor & Employment Ohio - Cleveland Midwest 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Labor & Employment Texas - Austin South 0.00% 0.29%
Placements Labor & Employment Texas - Dallas-Ft.Worth South 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Litigation Alabama South 0.00% 0.87%
Placements Litigation California - Los Angeles West 0.00% 2.17%
Placements Litigation California - Los Angeles - Westside West 1.34% 2.17%
Placements Litigation California - Oakland/East Bay West 0.00% 1.30%
Placements Litigation California - Orange County West 1.34% 1.01%
Placements Litigation California - Other West 0.00% 1.59%
Placements Litigation California - San Francisco West 2.68% 3.33%
Placements Litigation California - Silicon Valley/San Jose West 0.00% 0.87%
Placements Litigation Colorado - Denver Midwest 1.34% 0.51%
Placements Litigation Colorado - Other Midwest 0.00% 0.14%
Placements Litigation Delaware - Wilmington East 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Litigation District of Columbia East 0.67% 1.59%
Placements Litigation Florida - Miami East 0.67% 3.04%
Placements Litigation Florida - Orlando East 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Litigation Florida - Tampa East 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Litigation Georgia - Atlanta South 0.67% 0.87%
Placements Litigation Idaho West 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Litigation Illinois - Chicago Midwest 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Litigation Illinois - Other Midwest 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Litigation Indiana - Indianapolis Midwest 0.00% 0.87%
Placements Litigation Maryland - Baltimore East 0.00% 0.87%
Placements Litigation Massachusetts - Boston East 1.34% 0.87%
Placements Litigation Michigan - Ann Arbor Midwest 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Litigation Michigan - Other Midwest 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Litigation Minnesota - Minneapolis/St. Paul Midwest 0.00% 0.87%
Placements Litigation Missouri - Kansas City Midwest 0.00% 0.87%
Placements Litigation Missouri - St. Louis Midwest 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Litigation Nevada - Las Vegas Southwest 0.00% 0.17%
Placements Litigation New Jersey - Northern East 0.67% 0.87%
Placements Litigation New York - Long Island East 0.67% 0.29%
Placements Litigation New York - New York City East 3.36% 2.61%
Placements Litigation New York - White Plains/Westchester East 1.34% 0.87%
Placements Litigation North Carolina - Other East 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Litigation Ohio - Cleveland Midwest 0.67% 0.87%
Placements Litigation Oregon - Portland West 1.34% 0.00%
Placements Litigation Pennsylvania - Philadelphia East 0.67% 0.87%
Placements Litigation South Dakota Midwest 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Litigation Texas - Austin South 0.00% 0.29%
Placements Litigation Texas - Dallas-Ft.Worth South 1.34% 0.29%
Placements Litigation Texas - Houston South 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Litigation Washington - Seattle West 0.00% 2.61%
Placements Litigation Wisconsin - Other Midwest 0.67% 0.43%
Placements Maritime and Transportation Florida - Miami East 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Municipal Law California - Los Angeles - Downtown West 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Municipal Law California - Other West 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Municipal Law New York - White Plains/Westchester East 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Other District of Columbia East 0.00% 0.65%
Placements Patent Agents Missouri - Kansas City Midwest 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Patent Agents New York - New York City East 0.00% 0.87%
Placements Patent Agents Pennsylvania - Other East 0.00% 0.87%
Placements Patent Agents Washington - Seattle West 0.00% 0.87%
Placements Real Estate California - Los Angeles - Downtown West 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Real Estate California - Los Angeles - Westside West 0.67% 0.87%
Placements Real Estate California - Oakland/East Bay West 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Real Estate California - Orange County West 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Real Estate Colorado - Denver Midwest 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Real Estate Colorado - Other Midwest 0.00% 0.14%
Placements Real Estate Florida - Tampa East 0.00% 0.87%
Placements Real Estate Georgia - Atlanta South 0.00% 1.74%
Placements Real Estate Maryland - Other East 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Real Estate Nevada - Las Vegas Southwest 0.00% 0.17%
Placements Real Estate New York - New York City East 0.00% 0.87%
Placements Real Estate New York - Rochester East 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Real Estate Oregon - Portland West 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Real Estate Texas - Houston South 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Tax Connecticut - Hartford East 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Tax District of Columbia East 0.67% 0.87%
Placements Tax Florida - Orlando East 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Tax Georgia - Atlanta South 0.67% 0.43%
Placements Tax Missouri - St. Louis Midwest 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Tax New York - New York City East 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Tax Washington - Seattle West 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Technology Transactions Massachusetts - Boston East 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Technology Transactions New York - New York City East 0.67% 0.00%
Placements Technology Transactions Virginia - Northern East 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Technology Transactions Washington - Seattle West 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Trust and Estates California - Los Angeles West 0.67% 0.87%
Placements Trust and Estates Florida - Orlando East 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Trust and Estates Georgia - Atlanta South 0.00% 0.43%
Placements Trust and Estates Illinois - Chicago Midwest 0.67% 0.00%
 
 TOP
What This Means for Law Firms and Your Legal Career
 
  • Law firms should hire the best talent possible in smaller markets while they can. Law firms in smaller markets can grow and hire talented attorneys they might not otherwise be able to attract—they should go after them now.
  • Attorneys should expand their searches to smaller markets if they are interested in relocating.
 
  1. I Expected Tons of First-Year Layoffs and Widespread Cancellation of Summer Programs Would Occur

Law students, recent graduates, and junior attorneys require supervision. They should not be working at home unsupervised. They need to be trained, and without such training, their time needs to be written off. Most junior associates and law students in summer programs do not make money for law firms. When law firms are trying to save money, these are often the first to go. I gave a presentation on this early in the Coronavirus, and several law students and junior associates attacked me and did not want to believe this—they told me I was wrong. I did not see any other result that would have been possible. All this also occurred before the lockdowns and people not being able to work in offices.

This Assumption Was Correct
 
What This Means for Law Firms and Your Legal Career
 
  • Law firms should be careful with hiring junior attorneys and first-year attorneys. If these attorneys are hired and trained, they will be much more valuable to law firms later. Without summer associate programs feeding them new associates, law firms will have difficulty once the economy normalizes and they need to hire from a sparse lateral candidate pool. Law firms should be careful about canceling summer programs and letting go of junior attorneys because it will significantly affect their future profitability.
  • Attorneys should join law firms where they believe their careers will be safe. To be marketable later, an attorney who loses their job (or is worried about doing so) must work extremely hard to find a new one.
 TOP
 
  1. I Assumed Larger Law Firms Would Slow Down in Specific Practice Areas (Such as Corporate), Other Practice Areas Would Pick Up (Bankruptcy, Litigation, Employment), and Some Practice Areas Would Remain Steady (Patent)


These are the significant trends of what typically happens when the legal market slows down:
 
  • Corporate: Corporate always slows down in recessions because deal-making activity slows down. Companies do not want to do deals when money is tight, the market is frightened, and the economy slows. Raising money is also difficult for companies and more expensive.
  • Bankruptcy: Companies go bankrupt, and this creates bankruptcy work.
  • Litigation: Companies look around at other companies who may have wronged them in a good economy, or when the economy soured, and start filing lawsuits (these increase in poor economies and decrease in good economies when people are more likely to brush stuff off). Employment picks up because people lose their jobs, which creates work for attorneys either through counseling employers in how to reduce headcount or defending lawsuits from aggrieved employees (or classes of employees).
  • Real Estate: This is a toss-up. If interest rates stay low, this practice area can do well.
 
Most of These Assumptions Were Incorrect
 
  • Corporate slowed down—but not nearly as much as I believed it would. Specific practice areas I thought would go completely flat such as capital markets, even got quite busy. In past recessions and market corrections, corporate has come to a complete standstill—all over the country. In 2020, almost all forms of corporate work in all markets continued. New York, the Bay Area, Texas, and other markets stayed vibrant.
 
 
Status Practice Area Interview 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Corporate 14.77% 6.84% -53.67% 3 2
Interviews Corporate 13.85% 8.40% -39.35% 2 2
 
  • Real estate increased in activity. Low interest rates typically have meant a lot of real estate activity. This continued to be the case. However, what was unusual is that the market was in flux due to lots of sudden vacancies, reduced values, and an absence of financing due to nervous lenders. This did not make a lot of sense to us.  
 
Status Practice Area Interview 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Real Estate 4.70% 5.54% 17.84% 6 4
Interviews Real Estate 4.12% 5.73% 39.09% 5 4
 
  • Litigation got remarkably busy in smaller law firms; however, it slowed down massively in larger law firms. Large law firms in markets like New York and Chicago seemed to have a shortage of openings, and hardly anyone was interviewed and hired in large law firms in these markets after the virus started getting active. Los Angeles was also slow for larger law firms. Litigators were out of favor with large law firms in most major markets and major firms, but they were a desirable commodity in smaller law firms. It was odd—it almost seemed that litigators with the best qualifications were the most out of favor.
 
 
Status Practice Area Interview 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Litigation 25.50% 36.19% 41.90% 1 1
Interviews Litigation 32.98% 38.17% 15.74% 1 1
 
  • Bankruptcy never got that active. I assumed that there would be widespread bankruptcies and corporate failures creating an unprecedented demand for bankruptcy attorneys. When I saw what was developing, we started recruiting bankruptcy attorneys aggressively. We recruited bankruptcy clerks, current bankruptcy attorneys, and others. We had never had such a large stable of candidates. The market was not that interested. We placed several clerks (which was unusual) and some bankruptcy attorneys early on (in March to June) as law firms seemed to build up in anticipation of a lot of work. Overall, though, the volume was much less than we could have expected.
 
 
Status Practice Area Interview 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Bankruptcy 0.67% 4.13% 515.43% 18 7
Interviews Bankruptcy 0.74% 3.95% 433.79% 17 6
 
  • Labor and employment hardly had any activity and actually declined. I thought that people who lost their jobs would come after their employers and sue them creating a bonanza of legal work for labor and employment lawyers. This work never materialized—at least the hiring I saw did not back it up. We recruited labor and employment attorneys aggressively and they were much less successful in the market than we thought they would be.
 
 
Status Practice Area Interview 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Labor & Employment 17.45% 6.30% -63.87% 2 3
Interviews Labor & Employment 12.58% 3.98% -68.35% 3 5

What This Means for Law Firms and Your Legal Career
 
  • Law firms should let attorneys go from unprofitable practice areas with little work—sooner rather than later. Law firms should aggressively hire in practice areas where there is demand.
  • Attorneys should be careful about what practice area they are in and the firm they are practicing it with. If you are in a firm where there is not much work in your practice area, find one where there is. Law firms will use the ongoing pandemic as an excuse to cut ranks.
 TOP
 
  1. I Assumed That Laid-Off Attorneys Would Have Difficulty Finding New Positions with Equivalent Firms Ever Again

Law firms traditionally are interested in hiring only employed attorneys—colossal law firms. There has always been the perception in the market that a laid off or unemployed attorney is in the situation they are in because (1) they have done something wrong (they were fired), (2) they did not bill enough hours or add enough value at their previous law firm, (3) they are lazy and not interested in working, (4) they have an attitude problem, (5) they are not good politically and could not get the right person on their sides. An attorney without work has always been a real challenge—in all recessions.

The Assumption that Law Firms Would Not Be Interested in Unemployed Attorneys Was Incorrect
 
  • Law firms showed a surprising willingness to hire unemployed attorneys. Here, enough law firms let people go that being unemployed was not as much of a black mark as it was in the past. Instead, laid off attorneys were welcomed into law firms of all sizes in proportions they had never been before. We saw large law firms take more chances to hire unemployed attorneys than any other type of employer—this was amazing.

    Unemployment last year was no longer viewed as negatively as it once was.

What This Means for Law Firms and Your Legal Career
 
  • Law firms should look seriously at hiring unemployed attorneys and continue doing so. While they previously viewed unemployed attorneys as damaged goods or problematic, currently that may not be the case because of widespread layoffs. Unemployed attorneys will be grateful for the opportunity and hiring them may be the best chance you ever take.
  • Attorneys should not give up if you are laid off. You should look aggressively at both openings and firms without openings. You should apply far and wide—to large law firms and small law firms, in both significant and smaller markets.
     
  1. Fifteen Things I Did Not Assume, or Even Think or Talk About that Happened in 2020

The 2020 market was so unusual; several things happened I did not think would occur. I could never have imagined these would have happened at the start of the virus in March.
 
  1. I Assumed Consumer-Facing Law Firms in Practice Areas Such as Trust and Estates, Personal Injury, Family Law and Even Immigration Law Would Continue Not to Use Legal Recruiters

Legal recruiters have always assumed only large law firms that serve corporate clients use legal recruiters. In consumer-facing law firms, individuals rarely spend enough money with law firms to make using legal recruiters worthwhile. Thus, these firms are not interested in attorneys with the best qualifications, and it is easier for them to find people—most attorneys practice in these sorts of firms. They typically are not as interested in attorneys with the best qualifications and are more forgiving of law schools and other traditional measures large law firms used to hire attorneys.

This Assumption Was Wildly Incorrect: Consumer-Facing Practice Areas Demanded Service from Us at An Unprecedented Rate
 
  • Trust and Estates: In traditional economies, trust and estates are a sleepy practice area—so tired that we might get an interview for these attorneys once every few years. In 2020, we had attorneys in this practice area interviewing almost weekly. In previous years we almost stopped recruiting for this practice area because it was so slow. Large law firms often kept this practice area as a "loss leader" for their larger clients. In 2020, this practice area went bonkers and was in high demand—more so than ever. I was told a lot of this occurred because people were worried about dying because of the virus and were getting their estates in order. That makes sense, but I did not expect this would occur when everything started.
 
 
Status Practice Area Interview 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Trust and Estates 1.34% 1.74% -29.57% 17 15
Interviews Trust and Estates 2.33% 2.66% -14.56% 11 9
 
  • Personal injury: In the past, we rarely ever got job orders from personal injury law firms. It has not even been on our list of practice areas searchable in the BCG Attorney Search database. In 2020, this practice area became busy, and these firms were seeking lots of people. This practice area was never a practice area we placed people in. We did not track it with formal statistics but noticed lots of activity.
 
  • Family law. Virtually every family law attorney out there was marketable in 2020 if they were an associate. There was work in large markets, smaller markets, and everything in between. Virtually every family law attorney we worked with got multiple interviews. Again, this was formerly a practice area without a lot of activity that we got no interviews for and made zero placements. This is another practice area that was not even included on the BCG Attorney Search website. In 2020, we made multiple placements of family law attorneys, and everyone wanted them. We placed them in large markets and smaller markets. We saw some family law attorneys get five or more offers in some small markets—when they were not even from there!
 
 
Status Practice Area Interview 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Family Law 0.00% 3.77% -100.00% 30 8
Interviews Family Law 0.21% 1.82% -758.67% 25 13
 
  • Immigration Law. This made no sense to us. The US border was closed for a lot of 2020! Still, there was a ton of activity, and we were placing immigration attorneys and getting them interviews consistently.
 
 
Status Practice Area Interview 2019 2020 Growth or Decline Rank 2019 Rank 2020
Placements Family Law 0.00% 3.77% -100.00% 30 8
Interviews Family Law 0.21% 1.82% -758.67% 25 13
 
What This Means for Law Firms and Your Legal Career
 
  • Law firms should continue hiring in these practice areas to meet demand. Many law firms have successfully pulled people out of other markets and should continue to do so. Law firms should hire opportunistically in these practice areas. Also, large law firms should add practice areas like family law and trust and estates if they have not already.
  • Attorneys should move markets or firms if they are in these practice areas—or get into these practice areas if they are not in them. You are marketable, in demand, and can get a better job—or even move markets relatively quickly. This sort of opportunity has not existed before. Some of these practice areas (family law, personal injury) can be very profitable and pay large law firm salaries. Attorneys should consider working in these practice areas in major markets. These are also practice areas that new attorneys should consider—there appears to be a lot of ongoing work.
 TOP
 
  1. I Assumed Law Firms Only Very Rarely Hire People Without Meeting Them Face to Face



    I have placed people before that the law firm has not met, but these have been rare affairs. For example, I have placed a few attorneys from the US in Hong Kong, Saudi Arabia, Dubai, and other exotic locations that the firm only met through video calls – but that is about it over the past 20 years (yes, they even had video calls 20 years ago!) – but not US attorneys in the United States. However, firms in Europe, Asia, and other continents mostly still wanted to meet attorneys and almost always flew them over to interview in person. Our firm placed maybe one attorney a year (out of hundreds of placements) that the law firm did not meet in person. I assumed we would continue to see small pockets of this—however, not meeting people in person was not something I thought would ever change.

This Assumption Was Incorrect: Almost All Hiring and Interviewing Occurred Via Videoconference Interviews

The interest in meeting attorneys in person was something I believed would never go away. A law firm's major product is its people, culture, and need to come together as a coherent group to operate. They need to like each other in person. Attorneys want to observe other attorneys' mannerisms, how they make small talk, what they are like over meals, and similar stuff. There were hardly any placements we made after March of 2020 where the attorneys met in person. We had a few attorneys interview in parks wearing masks and similar odd episodes, but almost all the interviewing occurred on video conference platforms.

What This Means for Law Firms and Your Legal Career
 
  • Law firms should continue interviewing people via video conference but develop more methods to see what people are like in social and similar situations. This can mean doing informal video group meetings and other activities that give others a feeling of the type of person they are hiring. I also believe there is an excellent case for personality testing, additional references, and more types of understanding about the sort of person they are hiring. Lunches, cocktails, and other traditional screening methods are now out of favor, and seeing people gel with each culture is extremely important. It will avoid problems down the road when stuff gets back to more normal.
  • Attorneys should apply to as many markets as possible to increase their odds of finding the position they would like the most. Because most interviews are being done remotely, you do not need to travel to interview, which will create more opportunities than you might otherwise have to get a position. You should also work on your interviewing skills and understand things like looking into the camera, not saying "um" all the time, dressing well for interviews, setting up a good space for video calls (lighting and sound are important), and having calm, everyday surroundings in your interviews.
 TOP
 
  1. I Assumed That Law Firms Would Continue to Prefer Lateral Attorneys from the Existing Market, or Who Were Moving Home to Where They Are From

Law firms interview and hire people who are (1) currently working in the market or (2) moving home. If an attorney is already in the market, they are likely to stay there and have connections and roots. The attorney is unlikely to get up and leave. If an attorney is moving home (where they grew up), they are also likely to leave. Law firms are ongoing businesses and need stability. Hiring attorneys who are likely to stay where they are going is good business. Therefore, most placements we have always made are when an attorney has a strong connection to a legal market. Large law firms in New York and Silicon Valley, to a lesser extent, are always often interested in corporate attorneys and IP attorneys with excellent qualifications regardless of where they are from. Still, they prefer attorneys from their existing market mostly.
 
A second factor is also at work. Law firms also do not want to deal with the logistics and costs of bringing attorneys from out of state. These costs include flights, hotels, airport transportation, paying them to study for the bar, risking they may uproot their life and move to a market and then fail the bar, and more. They need to pay moving costs and worry about that. In most instances, law firms prefer to hire people without all the logistics involved. If they need an attorney to speak with a partner, the partner will need to be there on the day the attorney comes to the office. It can be a real hassle.
 
This Assumption Was Incorrect: Law Firms Did a Ton of Hiring of People with No Connection to the Market

I was shocked at how many people we could place with no connection to a given market. Law firms started interviewing many more people from outside their market that they traditionally would not have interviewed in the past—mainly because the travel costs and logistics were not that difficult. Suddenly, without needing to fly people out, they started interviewing and hiring many people with no connection to the market and hiring them. This happened more than we could ever have imagined. Law firms are interviewing far more people from each job, and among their candidates are people from out of state. Lawyers with no connection to a market are doing better than ever before in legal markets everywhere.
 
What This Means for Law Firms and Your Legal Career
 
  • Law firms should become increasingly open to interviewing attorneys from other geographic areas and backgrounds when searching for the best talent. Law firms in markets that are attractive to laterals (e.g., Hawaii!) have an unprecedented opportunity to bring in and hire people they have never had access to.
  • Attorneys should apply to as many markets as possible, realizing they have an excellent opportunity to get interviews now that they would never have gotten before.
 
  1. I Assumed There Would Not Be A Lot of Opportunistic Hiring And Law Firms Would Confine Their Hiring To Openings

In a good economy, law firms will hire people they like, regardless of whether they have openings. Some law firms are always hiring litigators, patent attorneys, and other attorneys when they are doing well, and the economy is healthy. When the economy slows down, these law firms often stop hiring opportunistically and then hire mainly for openings. When the economy slows down and the sentiment is low, law firms are very reluctant to take risks and hire people unless they have clearly defined openings. I assumed that most of our hiring post-March would be for firms with openings.
 
This Assumption Was Incorrect: Over 50% of Our Law Firm Hires and Interviews in 2020 Were with Firms that Did Not Have Openings
 
Compared to previous years, there was more hiring from law firms without openings than law firms with openings. Most of this hiring was in smaller markets and smaller law firms. Much of this hiring was for attorneys moving home to smaller markets from larger markets. When attorneys move home from larger markets to smaller markets, it is an "auction" of sorts. We typically encourage them to apply to many firms regardless of whether they have openings—so the law firms will compete to hire this attorney.
 
Regardless of what occurred and why it occurred, there was optimism in the market among firms that made them take a chance on hiring attorneys, despite not having any openings. We saw more hiring, from more firms without openings, than we have ever seen before.
 
Besides increased opportunistic hiring, law firms also started doing things they have never done with us—including, in some cases, hiring attorneys that had never worked as attorneys. Law firms suddenly were taking risks I have never seen before.
 
What This Means for Law Firms and Your Legal Career
 
  • Law firms should continue with opportunistic hiring. If you have the work or believe you will have the work, hiring attorneys is a no-lose proposition where you will make more money in the future and reduce attrition among overworked attorneys. Bringing people in that you need is always a good decision—especially now, since attorneys working from home do not require as much office space or administrative support.
  • Attorneys should apply to all the law firms they want to work in—regardless of whether they have openings. While the largest firms run more like efficient corporations and (mostly) do not hire opportunistically, smaller to mid-sized law firms do all the time. You should get your name out there and do everything you can to approach powerful firms in your practice area and the regions you want to work in.
 TOP
 
  1. I Assumed that Law Firms Would Continue to Need Face Time from their Attorneys

Law firms have always wanted attorneys present in the office. They pay a lot of money for offices. An office is a place where attorneys can exchange information. People feel camaraderie around others. I figured this would continue to be necessary, and law firms would figure out a way to get attorneys back in the office as quickly as possible.
 
This Assumption Was Incorrect: Law Firms Have Largely Abandoned Face Time and Think There Will be a Long-Term Sea Change in This

No one enjoys sitting in traffic, or public transportation, and the time spent commuting. People do not all enjoy having to shower for work and get ready each morning. People do not all enjoy a lack of privacy and people stopping by all the time in an office. Arguably, attorneys that are disciplined can be more productive at home.
 
I believe that the concept of face time in the office is gradually becoming less and less critical. While there was already an increasing trend towards telecommuting, this has received a boost from the pandemic, and law firms are starting to see that this works for most of their staff. Both partners and associates seem to enjoy working at home more and are often getting more accomplished than before.
 
What This Means for Law Firms and Your Legal Career
 
  • Law firms should allow attorneys to work more independently, provided they are showing high levels of productivity and discipline. Law firms should institute check-ins and other methods to ensure that their attorneys are working, focused, and not padding their hours—especially at the junior level. Law firms should create better management structures for remote work from their attorneys.
  • Attorneys should attempt to stay connected and visible to fellow attorneys, clients, and others. You want to be seen, heard from, and for people to know you are there. This is important from the perspective of advancement, getting work, training, and getting clients. You need to figure out alternative ways to be visible and get seen to keep your career on track.
 
  1. I Assumed Lateral Hiring Would Decrease in the Largest Law Firms, but Not to the Degree it Did

I assumed that lateral hiring would decrease in the largest law firms. I believed that it would slow down in specific practice areas and then get busy in others. Even in the depths of 2001, 2008, and other recessions, law firms were in the news for laying people off the same day they were hiring people through us. For example, 2008 was an exceptional year for our firm placing intellectual property litigators in New York City – even though the corporate market was dead then.

This Assumption Was Incorrect: Lateral Hiring Decreased More than it Ever Has in 2020 at Large Law Firms

Major law firms dramatically scaled back their hiring in 2020 after the virus hit. I have never seen such a slowdown, and this hit the largest cities particularly hard. Markets like New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, and others slowed down dramatically in large law firms. Chicago was a wasteland. I have never seen a more significant slowdown in lateral hiring from large law firms—not in 2000, 2001, or 2008 through 2011. I believe that large law firms slowed down so much because of their huge cost structures and fixed costs—offices, staff, and others they needed to keep paying despite the COVID-related fallout.

What This Means for Law Firms and Your Legal Career
 
  • Larger law firms should be careful about cutting back hiring if certain practice areas are likely to come back in the future. The cost of not hiring now may come back to haunt you later. If you are a smaller law firm, this means you have an excellent opportunity to invest in lateral talent now that is unable to get positions in larger law firms—this an excellent opportunity to increase your firm's strength.
  • Attorneys should understand the new dynamic of large law firm hiring. Attorneys seeking positions in large law firms will typically have better luck in branch offices of large law firms than in major cities—this is just how it is. We placed people in branch offices of national law firms in Idaho and other odd places in 2020 that we would never have before. If you must work outside of major markets, there is demand in large firms.
 TOP
 
  1. I Never Assumed How Widespread Law Firm Staff Layoffs Would Be

Even the most prestigious law firms were not immune to lots of staff layoffs. With lawyers working at home, a lot of the staff's work was no longer necessary. This may have increased the administrative work that attorneys needed to do and added to clients' bills, but this seems to be more of a permanent change occurring in the law firm market. I had never seen so many staff layoffs at firms in my career—huge law firms.
 
What This Means for Law Firms and Your Legal Career
 
  • Law firms should carefully reconsider their staffing. With more people working virtually, it makes sense to hire and use virtual staff in markets outside of major cities where they are less expensive, more loyal, and do not have as many opportunities. Law firms should be careful about bringing on additional staff and paying staff as much as they have in the past—unless they have some special skills rare in the market.
  • Attorneys should learn to become less reliant on staff and use personal productivity tools that make it less necessary for them to rely on staff in the future. Attorneys should not rely on staff to the degree they have in the past.
 
  1. I Never Assumed So Many Law Firms Would Get Forgivable Loans to Keep them Afloat

In previous recessions, law firms did not get loans to keep them going. They cut costs and pushed through. Most dramatically cut staff. Most acted quickly and decisively to cut costs and staff. Most law firms have always relied on credit lines to keep them going; however, this is not dischargeable debt, and the law firms and their partners guarantee these lines.
 
This Assumption Was Incorrect: Countless Law Firms Received Forgivable Loans

Many law firms got millions of dollars in financial relief—and countless law firms got loans. These loans helped these law firms stay afloat during the pandemic and kept people employed that might not otherwise have been. This has not happened in past recessions. These loans also kept businesses going that might have failed otherwise. Many law firms that would not have survived without loans could stay in business and prosper. The same is true of many clients. These loans put money into the economy and into law firms that kept them going. They would otherwise have failed without them. This created less bankruptcy work, kept certain practice areas like corporate going, and seems to have served its purpose to a great degree.
 
Because of the loans, many law firms did not lay people off. Other law firms started doing lots of hiring because of the additional funds from the loans coming in. Some law firms used these funds to restructure their operations and go after new lines of business. However, most law firms that received loans were required to keep attorneys employed a certain length of time (through mid-June for those that received first-round funding) to make the loans forgivable. A large percentage of the firms that received loans laid off legions of attorneys after mid-June. The loans were a stopgap measure for many firms.
 
What This Means for Law Firms and Your Legal Career
 
  • Law firms should get more forgivable loans in 2021 if they are available—and going into 2021, there is every sign they will be. These forgivable loans will allow the firms to keep attorneys employed and cover office and other expenses.
  • Attorneys should understand the financial condition of their firm as best they can. Law firms receiving loans in 2021 will be those whose revenue went down significantly in 2020. This means your firm may have financial issues, and you may be in danger of losing your position after conditions of keeping you employed for a certain length of time run out for these loans.
 TOP
 
  1. I Never Assumed That So Many Businesses Would Succeed During the Pandemic and There Would Be Such Economic Optimism in the Stock Market

During previous recessions, a sense of economic dread and a lack of optimism has always been present in the market. Consumers, businesses, and others stop spending, the stock market goes down, and people get extremely nervous. That is just how it works. This affects the legal market, of course, because there is less spending.
 
This Assumption Was Incorrect: Portions of the Economy Boomed and the Stock Market Was on a Tear

From healthcare to Amazon, to Tesla, to Google, to Zoom, Netflix, and other businesses: The stock market and many sectors took off and did extremely well. Consumers moved their dollars to online shopping, and the market seemed to boom with wildly successful IPOs and recorded stock market valuations. Even Bitcoin came back hard, and its value increased. Real estate took off and dramatically increased in importance in many suburbs and areas outside major cities, while malls started a massive, precipitous decline in value.

What This Means for Law Firms and Your Legal Career
 
  • Law firms should concentrate their efforts on bringing in and servicing clients that are doing well and have succeeded in the current economy. They should recruit partners and others with these clients, or the ability to attract them or service their work.
  • Attorneys should try to work with firms doing well in the current legal market and prospering in these conditions. That will give them additional security in the future. Attorneys with the ability to do so should concentrate their business development efforts on such clients.
 
  1. I Never Assumed Law Firms Would Reduce their Fixed Cost so Dramatically and Put Themselves in Such a Dominant Position to be Profitable in the Future

I assumed that law firms would let go of some attorneys and legal staff to cut costs. This is how law firms have handled all recessions. I never understood the extent to which law firms would reduce their fixed costs—which was dramatic and unprecedented. Law firms are likely to raise and not lower their billing rates.

This Assumption was Incorrect: Law Firms Dramatically Reduced Their Fixed Costs More than I Could Have Expected
 
  • Staff: Law firms reduced their legal staff dramatically. From copy rooms, the secretaries, to word processing and more, these costs were dramatically cut. I believe law firms will not bring back many of the positions they cut—nor will they need to in the future.
  • Offices: A major cost of law firms (and their identities) have traditionally been centered around their office. Office space, build-outs, furniture, art, and more were major cost centers. During the pandemic, law firms have realized they do not need a lot of this space and that people can work at home. While many law firms have ongoing lease obligations, the odds are they will rely less on physical offices in the future, and this will save them a great deal of money and make them more profitable.
  • Travel: This has also been a high cost for law firms in the past. With Zoom and other platforms, the time and cost of traveling to visit clients, go to court, and more is no longer as justified as it was in the past. This has reduced their costs.
  • Parking: This may sound ridiculous to mention, but law firms have 200+ parking spots they pay for in some buildings for their attorneys that cost hundreds of dollars a month each. This is a cost they are not paying.
  • Retreats, Parties, and More: These in-person events were a big time and money suck for law firms in the past. This cost has also been primarily eliminated—Friday parties, office cafeterias, sundries and snacks on demand, late-night meals—all gone.
  • Summer Programs. Summer programs are a loss leader for most law firms. They lose money on these programs to hire new attorneys out of law school and brand their firms to law students. I believe that with the pandemic, law firms will stop relying on summer programs as much and will increasingly hire more lateral attorneys.
 
What This Means for Law Firms and Your Legal Career
 
  • Law firms should realize that reducing their fixed costs is now a competitive advantage that will allow them to pay their equity partners more money and attract better partners and associates. Law firms need to act as quickly as possible to keep fixed costs down and increase them slowly. Law firms should also use the savings from this to reduce debt.
  • Attorneys should not expect as many benefits as they had in the past and cooperate with their firms to eliminate this. Attorneys should expect that much of these savings will provide them more employment security and maintain higher salaries.
 TOP
 
  1. I Never Assumed Attorneys and Remote Work Would Become So Universally Accepted, and Attorneys Would Start Working Remotely from All Over the World

I could never have assumed the degree to which people would work at home. I just never thought that entire firms would start practicing remotely. That was a tremendous surprise. It should have been clear that this would occur—but I did not make the connection. I figured that attorneys would continue working close to the office, coming into the office now and then and staying connected that way.

This Assumption Was Wildly Incorrect: Attorneys Moved to Different Parts of the Country and World to Work Remotely

I saw attorneys from major law firms in New York City working in as diverse places as (1) a boat in the middle of a lake in Florida, (2) a small town in Virginia, (3) the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. Attorneys from other parts of the country moved to Florida, one to Mexico, another to rural Washington, and even Reno, Nevada. No longer bound by commutes and the need to go to the office, attorneys moved all over the country (and world), and many seemed to enjoy this. Working in other parts of the world gave them freedom. Many were happier. I bet that most of them are not looking forward to going back to offices or moving to their home markets again—many may never do this.

What This Means for Law Firms and Your Legal Career
 
  • Law firms should start developing better systems for having attorneys work remotely. They should begin interviewing and hiring a greater variety of people from different parts of the country to work remotely. They should adjust salaries for attorneys in different parts of the country. If a law firm plans on making this a permanent arrangement for attorneys, they should market this in their lateral hiring as much as possible.
  • Attorneys should learn how to become indispensable while working remotely. They should look at as many markets as possible when applying for positions. If attorneys are interested in working remotely, they should find firms where this is acceptable. Attorneys need to understand that although it is becoming more common, working remotely will create barriers to advancement, and attorneys who continue to do this for a long period may see their careers suffer.
 
  1. I Never Assumed that Senior Litigators (With No Business) Would Become So in Demand in Various Areas of the Country

Because litigation is the most popular practice area for attorneys, there is a massive oversupply of litigators—especially at the senior level. This means that as litigators get more senior and have no business, it becomes tough for them to get jobs. Certain practice areas have comparatively few attorneys doing them (for example patent, corporate, real estate, ERISA). These attorneys can almost always find something if they look hard enough because there are not enough of them to meet the demand—even at the senior level. Not so with senior litigators—they are all over.

This Assumption Was Incorrect: We Made Many Placements of Senior Litigators (Mainly in Smaller to Midsize Markets) Outside of Major Cities

Law firms in many markets (Orange County and Long Island come to mind) needed senior litigators with trial experience. They were hungry for these attorneys, and there was a significant demand to find them. I never saw so much demand for trained litigators with trial skills in my career. With many trials occurring online, trials are much more accessible and require less travel than in the past. Most stuff is going to trial, and most litigators are experts in brief writing, discovery, and settlement, not trial experts.
 
What This Means for Law Firms and Attorneys
 
  • Law firms should continue to hire a bench of sophisticated and experienced trial attorneys so their attorneys can take cases to trial. It is essential for law firms to have talented attorneys who can sell juries always ready to go.
  • Attorneys with trial experience should do their best to get out in the market and find opportunities—even if they do not believe they are marketable because of a lack of business. Younger litigators should get trial experience if they can act as soon as possible.
 TOP
 
  1. I Never Expected the Pressure that Social Movements Would Place on Law Firms to Change Throughout the Country

I assumed that 2020 would be like 2019. We would have an expanding economy, diversity would remain important, and the world would continue as it was.

This Assumption Was Wildly Incorrect: The Politics of Law Firms and the Country Transformed in 2020

I could never have expected social change that happened in 2020 with widespread riots, occupation of areas of various cities, a toxic political climate, and much more than I could list here. There was, to a great extent, a social and political revolution. With this social movement, law firms and corporations became more concerned than ever before with people of distinct races, sexes, and orientations inside their firms and management positions.

Many of the searches I received from law firms seeking partners specifically demanded that they be a woman or ethnic minorities. The law firms reflected companies' drive and the prevailing political climate for equality and casting off old ways of thinking. Law firms became increasingly tolerant of people and thought patterns and beliefs. They formerly were non-supportive.
 
What This Means for Law Firms and Attorneys

All of this means that the traditionally conservative, intolerant, and exclusionary nature of the largest law firms—and most—is changing and trying to welcome a unique form of thought. The country seems to move closer to a socialist-type government and thought patterns, creating alternative forms of work for attorneys. Instead of enforcing the status quo for large corporations, law firms seem to move towards changing the status quo and challenging it.
 
  • Law firms should attempt to remain neutral regarding taking sides in any social movement. Preserving the ability to appeal to many clients (whether democratic or republican) is a strength. Law firms should embrace the values of society while not taking sides too aggressively.
  • Attorneys should attempt to be advocates for their clients first and not come across as having social interests that might offend other members of their law firm or potential clients. Getting too involved in social issues makes it difficult for law firm attorneys to take the side of whatever client they are representing and gives the appearance of having more interest in pushing their agenda than that of their clients.
 
  1. I Never Expected So Many Smaller to Medium-Sized Law Firms to Have So Much Trouble Finding and Recruiting the Right People in All Practice Areas

Small to mid-sized law firms have traditionally not used legal recruiters much and have hired through word-of-mouth, online advertisements, and similar recruiting methods. These methods have traditionally worked for them because they are, mostly, servicing smaller clients with less ongoing work and do not always need the same caliber of attorneys that larger law firms do to impress their clients. They rarely pay the highest salaries and represent an "alternative" to big firm hours and demands.

This Assumption Was Incorrect: Smaller to Medium-Sized Law Firms in Secondary to Tertiary Markets (and Some Larger Markets) Had a Lot of Trouble Finding People

There was so much demand that daily, we were receiving countless calls, emails, and other requests from firms to find them attorneys in all practice areas—we have never seen this much demand before. These firms could not find people despite tons of advertising and other work they were doing on their own. These firms needed people. While there has been some demand from smaller law firms in the past, the demand level in 2020 was very strong and kept us busy throughout the latter half of the year.

What This Means for Law Firms and Attorneys
 
  • Law firms should become more aggressive at recruiting lateral attorneys going forward and develop full-time recruiting departments that understand how to recruit attorneys. Law firms should advertise and promote their positions more widely and learn how to promote their openings.
  • Attorneys should realize that there is a lot of demand for them from small to medium firms, and they should apply to these firms whether they have openings or not. There is more opportunity in the market than most attorneys realize.
 TOP
 
  1. I Never Anticipated the Number of People that Large and Small Law Firms Would Start Interviewing for Each Position and the Competition for Each Job

A law firm with an opening traditionally interviewed a handful of people for each opening, made an offer to the one they liked the best, and chose their second-choice person if the first offer did not go through. However, because interviews cost attorney time and requires a ton of logistics, most law firms have never done a lot of interviewing for each position. In most cases, if a law firm interviewed one of our candidates with a full round of interviews after a screening interview, the odds of them ultimately getting the position was something close to 50%—and even close to 90% for some firms.

This Assumption Was Incorrect: Law Firms Interviewed More People and Made Fewer Offers than Ever Before

Because of Zoom interviews, law firms are interviewing more people for their openings than ever before. They are also hiring less. Instead of hiring 50% of people who made it to second round interviews, many law firms are hiring between 10 and 30% of the people. They interview many more people because it costs less money and takes less time.

What this Means for Law Firms and Attorneys
 
  • Law firms should interview more people to find attorneys likely to be the best fit for them. They can better test culture and other factors that will make suitable matches. They do not need to hire the first person who comes in the door who looks good. They can afford the time to interview more candidates and employ the best people.
  • Attorneys should be better prepared for interviews because law firms are interviewing more people. Attorneys should apply to more places because they are more likely to get interviews.
 

Harrison’s 118 Predictions for 2021

 

Law Student and New Attorney Hiring

 
  1. Law firms will cut back on law student and new attorney hiring because they will still try to keep costs down.
  2. Law firms will cut back on law student and new attorney hiring because they will not be interested in remote training.
  3. Law students will have trouble in the legal market through 2021.
  4. Class of 2021 graduates will have a hard time getting positions.
  5. Many 2020 graduates will never get law firm jobs if they have not already and will go into alternative careers.
  6. Many 2021 graduates will never get legal jobs and will go into alternative careers.
  7. Law students and new attorneys working virtually will disappoint many law firms and lose their positions.
  8. Law students who got jobs in the summer and offers from firms will be more employable in the future.
  9. Class of 2019 graduates who got jobs and held onto them will be employable in the future.
  10. Internally motivated law students and new attorneys who do not need a lot of direction will do the best.
  11. Law firms will hire 2021 graduates and let many of them go within months, and many of these 2021 graduates will never get positions in a law firm again.
 TOP

Associate Hiring

 
  1. Trained associates will be precious and increasingly marketable to large and smaller law firms.
  2. Law firms in major markets will continue to value attorney pedigrees; however, more so than pedigrees, having summer associate experience and on-the-job training will matter more.
  3. Certain practice areas will experience a shortage of trained junior associates (real estate), and attorneys who can stay employed through 2021 will be very marketable later.
  4. Large law firms will start valuing independence in younger associates more than they have in the past.
  5. Large law firms will hire fewer junior associates than they have in the past because they will have a hard time managing them remotely.
  6. Litigators with clerkships will be more valuable and placeable than they were in the past because of the close training they received from judges (often in person despite the pandemic).
  7. Clients will continue to cut costs and send work to smaller law firms, and this will increase the amount of work in these law firms and the demand for trained, talented attorneys in these markets.
  8. Law firms without openings will continue hiring associates and others, and this trend is likely to increase.
  9. Law firms will not be as discriminatory against laid-off attorneys as they were in the past and will hire them more than they used to.
  10. Larger law firms will do less associate hiring because they are trying to reduce most fixed costs (staff, offices).
  11. Many 2020 and 2019 graduates will be let go—for financial reasons, but also because of impatience with their work product, hours, and ability to catch on while working remotely.
  12. Law firms will continue hiring people without face-to-face meetings.
  13. Many associates will be hired and work in markets outside of where they are listed as working on law firm websites. New York attorneys, for example, maybe actually found most of the year in Florida.
  14. Smaller law firms will hire attorneys from larger law firms who value work-life balance and working from home.
  15. Law firms will interview far more people for openings than they ever have in the past.
 TOP

Practice Area Highlights

 
  1. Most consumer-oriented practice areas such as family law, personal injury, and others will continue to stay busy and need recruiters to help fill openings. HOT
  2. Data privacy will get remarkably busy and become a more significant practice area. HOT
  3. Antitrust work will pick up in the Bay Area, Washington, DC, and become a highly active and growing practice in the US and internationally. HOT
  4. Corporate will get busier and be much more active towards the end of the year. MEDIUM
  5. Education will become much busier, and education attorneys will be in demand. HOT
  6. Energy work will slow down and continue doing so. COLD
  7. Entertainment-related work will continue slowing down and will not get more active until the second half of 2021. COLD
  8. Environmental and land use will start getting busier than it has been in several years, and law firms will begin hiring more. GETTING HOT
  9. ERISA/executive compensation will remain steady, and attorneys with these skills will be in demand. MEDIUM
  10. Family law will continue to get busier and stay busy throughout the year. HOT
  11. Most forms of finance will remain relatively steady. MEDIUM
  12. Food and drug law will remain continually active and get more active throughout the year. HOT
  13. Healthcare attorneys will continue to be in demand, and there will be a shortage of them. HOT
  14. Immigration will get busier in the second half of 2021. MEDIUM
  15. International trade, already a very niche practice group, will get busier. MEDIUM
  16. Most forms of litigation will remain busy. HOT
  17. Patent prosecution will remain an active practice area, and patent prosecutors of all seniority levels will be marketable. MEDIUM
  18. Real estate will continue to slow down. COLD
  19. Tax will remain a relatively inactive practice area for lateral hiring. COLD
  20. Technology transactions will continue to be an active niche practice area. MEDIUM
  21. Telecommunications will remain mostly unchanged. COLD
  22. Trust and estates will continue to be highly active. HOT
  23. Bankruptcy will pick up after the first half of 2021 as vast swaths of real estate companies file for bankruptcy. HOT
  24. Labor and employment will get busier than they have been, but not much. MEDIUM
 TOP

Diversity and Social Movements

 
  1. Law firms will continue to push diversity in all ranks, which will become an even more critical component in hiring and advancement than it has been in the past.
  2. Law firms in the largest cities will become increasingly liberal.
  3. Law firms in most cities will advance into management roles a higher percentage of women than they ever have in the past.
  4. Law firms will continue to struggle to attract the best African American attorneys.

Law Firm Culture

 
  1. Law firms' cultures will be less pronounced than they were in the past, and these cultures will drift from their former centers.
  2. Because of virtual interviews, hiring, and training, new classes of attorneys entering the firm will be more influenced by the prevailing cultural norms of the larger society than by the firm where they are working. This will create conditions where law firms are at risk of having their cultures severely undermined.
  3. With a weakening internal culture of interpersonal relationships and an increasing number of attorneys working remotely, law firms will become more and more "siloed," leading to more dissatisfaction among the attorneys working there and distrust of other attorneys outside of their immediate circle.
  4. Distinct classes of attorneys will develop—those who work remotely and those who do not. Those who do not will view attorneys who work remotely as a second class of attorney with less work, less profitable work, less opportunity for advancement, and more likelihood of being let go than attorneys who go back in the office in the latter half of 2021. Attorneys working from significant locations (think attorneys in markets like Chicago) will resent attorneys supposedly in their same office working from resort-type markets (think Florida palm trees or Colorado skiing).
  5. Law firms will develop cultures via Zoom and other platforms where some attorneys (and firms) consistently turn off their cameras to hide from clients, opposing counsel, and other attorneys in their firm. Others do not turn off their cameras.
  6. Some law firms will use their logo in all zoom meetings and put it behind their attorneys, and others will not.
  7. Law firms will start hosting events for their clients and attorneys to invite celebrities and others to speak and perform on Zoom.
  8. Law firms will develop increasingly sophisticated online profiles on social media sites and use this for recruiting both clients and lateral attorneys.
 TOP

Associate Movement

 
  1. Many associates will move back to areas where they grew up. Associates will be closer to their families than they were in the past.
  2. Associates from large markets who have been working remotely in smaller markets will choose to stay in these markets after being asked to return to the office in the second half of 2021.
  3. As law firms start asking people to come back to the office and not work remotely, many attorneys will quit their jobs—or find new law firms where this is acceptable.
Sexual Harassment, Racism, Sexism and Other Issues Inside of Firms
 
  1. Law firms will record their Zoom conferences where sexual harassment and racism are visible between attorneys, which will harm many firms.
  2. There will be a recorded Zoom conference between attorneys where attorneys will make grossly inappropriate statements about clients, opposing counsel, and others, and that recording will be distributed.
  3. Virtual, mainly "emotional" affairs will develop between fellow attorneys, attorneys and staff, and others, and these will come out and do harm to many attorneys in large law firms and sidetrack many careers.

Partner Movement

 
  1. Partners with businesses who do not require their law firms' support or brand will start working more with small law firms who offer them a higher percentage of their collections. These partners’ movement will increase as partners rely less on support from associates and legal staff within the firms.
  2. Without as much in-person camaraderie among partners, partners will begin investigating more firms that give them more of a sense of connection with other attorneys and an understanding of the importance of working with staff.
 TOP

Attorney Satisfaction

 
  1. Many attorneys will be unsatisfied without close and direct relationships with colleagues at work. This will make them feel isolated and depressed.
  2. Attorneys will work more hours at home and feel increasingly “stir crazy” without in-person contact with colleagues.
  3. In my estimation, attorneys have always been more satisfied with their careers in smaller markets and in smaller regional law firms than major law firms. This trend will continue, and the value systems of new attorneys coming out of school and attorneys currently working remotely and in smaller markets will speed up this trend.

Attorney Physical and Mental Health

 
  1. Not needed in an office each day, attorneys’ health with suffer. They will exercise less and eat more unhealthily than when in the office.
  2. Attorneys with substance abuse issues will experience more issues because their problems will be unchecked—they will use more than they did pre-pandemic, and the sense of isolation will hurt them.
  3. Without more direct social connection, many attorneys' psychological health will worsen while working at home.

Attorney Relationships with Significant Others

 
  1. Stuck at home, attorneys will experience more issues with significant others than they did pre-COVID, and this will create more stress and problems in their lives.
 TOP

Salaries.

 
  1. Large law firms will start paying lower salaries to attorneys working remotely in areas outside of major metropolitan areas.
  2. Salaries will continue to increase for the most in-demand practice areas (corporate).
  3. Law firms will continue to raise salaries and bonuses throughout 2021.
  4. The average profits per partner at most large law firms will increase and be brought about by better management of equity versus non-equity partners, cutting costs, and eligibility for profit distributions.

Contract and Staff Attorneys

 
  1. Law firms will increasingly use contract and staff attorneys in many practice areas where they are not confident about ongoing work requirements.
  2. Unsure and sometimes not confident about the economy's overall direction, many law firms (large and small) will start making initial offers to attorneys to work on contract before committing to them permanently.
  3. Because having attorneys working in different markets as employees or partners might open them to taxation in these regions, many law firms will convert associates to contract attorneys in areas these attorneys are working remotely or let them go.
 TOP

Partner Hiring

 
  1. Partners with substantial portable business will be more marketable than in the past.
  2. Many large law firms will make guarantees to lateral partner hires with business that does not materialize—this trend will continue.
  3. In search of high payouts and guarantees, many law firm leaders will increasingly lobby behind the scenes for mergers.
  4. Partner hiring and movement will increase in the largest markets.
  5. Many partners will move to markets outside of major cities (Chicago, New York) and service their clients (markets like Savannah, Georgia, or Taos, New Mexico). These partners will also investigate joining other local law firms in these markets, and some will move firms.
  6. Many partners will try to move to low-tax jurisdictions (Texas, Florida, Washington state, Montana, Wyoming) to save money.
  7. Law firms will interview more partners than they have in the past for each potential opening.
  8. Partners with business will interview with more firms than they ever have in the past due because they can keep their search discreet by not having to be seen walking into offices.

Staff

 
  1. Law firms will start hiring a lot more virtual staff—including staff overseas they outsource work to.
  2. Law firms will continue to reduce internal staff.
  3. Attorneys will start using more virtual assistants as they increasingly work at home.
 TOP

Business Development

 
  1. Attorneys who had books of business before the pandemic will continue developing and growing these books. They will get stronger in 2021 due to their former personal relationships.
  2. Attorneys without a lot of business going into the pandemic will continue to not have a lot of business in 2021, and their careers will suffer.
  3. Law firms will begin doing more webinars and other virtual events to meet and attract new clients.

Hours

 
  1. Law firms will start expecting hours to increase for attorneys that do not spend time commuting.
  2. Without face-time requirements in the office, partners and many associates will begin padding bills.
  3. Many associates and other attorneys will lack focus at work and start doing contract work and other things on the side because they will not be supervised.

Turnover

 
  1. Many junior attorneys will yearn for more connection and investigation of the market than they have previously because they are not getting direct, face-to-face contact with peers or other attorneys.
  2. When attorneys go back to the office, many will realize they do not like their peers or working in an office and will start investigating the market and looking for new jobs.
  3. Insecure about their firm's status and not getting daily feedback, many attorneys will start investigating the market out of concern they may lose their jobs.

Offices

 
  1. No longer hindered by expensive office space and staffing requirements, numerous law firms will begin opening offices in new areas using local, "virtual" attorneys. Law firms will begin aggressively expanding their footprints around the globe as well.
  2. The Austin market will become a trendy market for law firms to have offices in. Other areas of Texas, such as Houston, will also be popular.
  3. Florida will become a more popular market for opening new offices.
  4. Seattle will be a target location for many law firms.
  5. The New York City market will be a less popular market for opening new offices.
  6. The Chicago market will be a less popular market for opening new offices.
 TOP

Senior Attorneys

 
  1. Senior attorneys without business from significant markets and firms will become more marketable in smaller markets than they have been in the past.

Attorney Advancement

 
  1. Attorneys who insist on working remotely, or are working remotely, will harm their careers and have difficulty advancing. There will be a trend towards remote work, but this negatively affects attorneys who opt for less face time inside firms when law firms go back to work.

Productivity Tools

 
  1. Law firms will start using tools (like screen monitoring software) to monitor associates’ and staff's productivity working remotely.
  2. Hungry for connection and identity with other attorneys, clients, and others, tools like LinkedIn will become increasingly popular.

Small Markets

 
  1. Law firms in smaller markets will attract and hire more associates and partners than they have in the past.

Large Markets and Firms

 
  1. Because of downward pressure on their rates from smaller firms and talented attorneys moving to smaller firms and markets, many large law firms will increasingly shed their least profitable practice areas (labor and employment, trust and estates, trademark, patent prosecution).
  2. Large law firms will watch the profitability that many law firms have had filing plaintiff class action and other types of suits, and more law firms than ever before will enter this race.
  3. Privacy litigation will become a highly active practice area for many large law firms.
 TOP


Download the BCG Attorney Search App for the Latest Articles

AGREE/DISAGREE? SHARE COMMENTS ANONYMOUSLY! We Want to Hear Your Thoughts! Tell Us What You Think!!

We've changed thousands of lives over the past 20 years, and yours could be next.

When you use BCG Attorney Search you will get an unfair advantage because you will use the best legal placement company in the world for finding permanent law firm positions.