What's Hot and What's Not? Practice Growth in the AM Law Second Hundred

7 November 2024
Bar graph showing top growing and declining practices by city in the United States from 2019-2021.

Not long ago, we looked at practice area growth among the AM Law 100 and found some interesting trends. Cybersecurity and Corporate work led the way with the highest increases in Partner headcount, while various Litigation practices saw sharp decreases in Partner numbers.


So now comes the turn of the AM Law 101-200! Using data from Pirical Legal Professionals (PLP), we've taken a look at Partner headcount growth by practice between 2019-2024 to reveal which practices are on the up and which have been shrinking.


Practices that have been growing 📈

What's hot? Top 30 growing practices in the AM Law 101-200

Litigation work is fundamental to the AM Law second hundred

Across the AM Law 200 more Partners work in Litigation than any other practice group. For firms ranked 101-200, Litigation represents the primary practice group of 42% of Partners and accounts for almost half of the top growing practices listed above.


In particular, Partner headcount has increased in Employment Litigation and IP Litigation practices across multiple locations.

AM Law divide

Government Law and Private Client work are focuses of growth for second hundred firms, but not the AM Law 100

Two of the AM Law 101-200's highest growth practice groups make up some of the lowest growth areas among AM Law 100 firms.


The clear practice area in common across both halves of the AM Law 200 is Cybersecurity, Privacy & Data Protection, where Partner headcount has grown significantly for the top 100 (+36%) and the second hundred (+34%).

Chart showing practice groups with highest growth from 2018-2024, highlighting Corporate & Public Health Law and Defense Law, green bars.

AM Law divide

California has been a focus of growth for AM Law 101-200 firms but has seen relatively low growth among the top  100

Across San Diego, San Francisco and Los Angeles, Partner headcount among second hundred firms has grown by +32% since 2019, compared to just +11% for AM Law 100 firms. Litigation work and a handful of firms growing aggressively (such as Buchalter, Fisher Philips and Fennermore Craig) has driven this West Coast increase.


Back in May, our analysis of practice growth among the AM Law 100 found that California had experienced relatively low growth, partly driven by a decline in some Litigation practices.

Bar graph: Highest partner headcount growth by city in the United States, 2010-2014. Philadelphia shows the highest growth.

Practices that have been shrinking 📉

What's not? Top 30 declining practices in the AM Law 101-200

Product Liability is the most common declining practice area

The practice has decreased in headcount across multiple cities since 2019, with a number of firms losing Partners to bigger rivals. Most notably, AM Law 100 firm Nelson Mullins has poached Product Liability Partners from several second hundred firms in recent years, including Tucker Ellis, Lathrop GPM and Benesch.

AM Law divide

The AM Law 100 are growing in Regulatory & Compliance, Corporate and International Trade more than firms ranked 101-200

Several of the AM Law 101-200’s lowest growth practice groups make up some of the highest growth areas among top 100 firms.


The gulf in Corporate work is particularly stark, the AM Law 100 has increased Partner numbers in Corporate practices by over 1,600 since 2019, compared to a headcount rise of just 167 Partners among the second hundred. Currently, Corporate is the primary practice group of 20% of AM Law 100 Partners and 10% of 101-200 Partners.

Chart showing practice groups with lowest growth, green bars indicate growth percentage.

Detroit, Phoenix and a few Midwestern cities have seen decreases in Partner headcount

Detroit based law firms Honigman and Dickinson Wright account for a significant number of the Partner departures there. While Dickinson Wright again, makes up much of the decline in headcount in Phoenix, alongside Quarles & Brady.

Bar graph showing lowest partner headcount growth by city in the US from 2010-2014. Detroit has the lowest growth, Boston the highest.

Note on methodology

Source: Pirical Legal Professionals, using publicly available data

Timeframe: Jan 2019 - Sep 2024

Includes practices with more than 15 Partners and attributes 1 primary practice per Partner

Includes cities with more than 200 Partners and attorneys with multiple locations have been equally distributed across each

Written using data from Pirical Legal Professionals (PLP)

Unlock unparalleled coverage of the legal market


Global attorney database built with the most comprehensive sources of data on the market. Designed for law firm lateral hiring teams, legal headhunters and strategy planners, our data tracks over 610,000 profiles across 130+ countries. PLP enables firms to source talent quicker, leverage their own network for referral opportunities, map out competitors’ org structures, research new markets and much more.

Try PLP for 1 hour

Stay up-to-date with the latest market insights and law firm rankings

Subscribe to email updates

Subscribe to content

Spreadsheet table with green column headers and rows of text and numbers on a white background
by Emily Turner 1 May 2026
The first quarter of 2026 has wrapped up, so which firms started the year off with the most lateral Partner hires? We’ve taken a look, using publicly-available data tracked by Pirical Legal Professionals .
by Emily Turner 30 April 2026
Pirical Rankings: Which AM Law 101-200 Firms Have The Best Lateral Partner Retention?
by Craig Savitzky 30 April 2026
A landmark Supreme Court decision just invalidated presidential tariff authority. Big Law firms are now racing to capture what could become one of the most lucrative litigation waves in recent memory. More than 2,000 refund lawsuits have already been filed. The stakes exceed $100 billion in potentially recoverable duties. An exclusive analysis by Pirical identifies which law firms are best positioned to capitalize on the tariff litigation boom. The analysis weighs three factors: client representation, practice investment, and specialized expertise. Kirkland & Ellis emerges as the clear market leader. The firm represents 12 major companies seeking tariff refunds. That's double the client count of its nearest competitor. Kirkland's 74.8 composite score in Pirical's three-pillar analysis significantly outpaces Akin Gump (58.9) and Latham & Watkins (51.3), which round out the top three.