Which Are America’s Most Trusted Law Firms?

lawyers

Where Are The High Growth Areas?

It takes ‘Forbes’, that purveyor of key lists that attract eyeballs everywhere, to provide us with the largest law firms in the world – and to outline how some are growing faster than ever.

They are also becoming more specialized.

Working with Statista, ‘Forbes’  selected 243 firms and identified the most recommended ones for their law firm survey in 17 practice areas, based on survey responses from 2,500 lawyers.

The selection of firms involved both the household name Big Law outfits and smaller boutiques with very specific focus.

Although the recession hit the bottom line for many firms, the recovery is well and truly underway.

Two firms have surpassed $3 billion in annual revenue. Kirkland & Ellis has been the top revenue-producing firm in the world for the past two years, doubling its revenue in the past decade to $3.76 billion last year.

Meanwhile, Latham & Watkins is focused on reaching $4 billion revenue for the 2019 year.

The others in the billion dollar law firm group include Baker McKenzie; DLA Piper; Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom; Sidley Austin, Hogan Lovells, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius; Clifford Chance; Jones Day; White & Case; and Dentons. 

What Are The Law Firm Growth Areas?

The major areas of law practice for the ‘majors’ has been transactional law, M&A work, litigation and the well-established areas of law practice.

But the new technologies and other changes are bringing new areas of lucrative practice, like cryptocurrency and cannabis law issues, data privacy and cybersecurity issues.

The Miami-based law firm Akerman has a strong cannabis practice, launched in 2014, that was among the first in big law to actively exploit the new area and to advise clients such as investment funds, cultivators, processors and dispensaries on the intricacies of cannabis regulation.

Now Duane Morris and Sheppard Mullin have substantial teams advising on cannabis laws at state and federal level.

Seattle’s Perkins Coie was an early entrant into the blockchain area of law, launching its blockchain technology and digital currency practice in 2013 with 40 lawyers advising over 200 clients. 

Diversity & Gender Parity

Diversity and gender parity have become big concerns for law firms.

According to the National Association for Law Placement, female and black lawyers made “small gains” at major U.S. law firms in 2018, as compared with 2017, and at the partner level, women and minorities “continued to make small gains.” 

Punching Above Weight

Another notable development in the legal world is also the rise of regional firms that punch above their weight focused on key areas of specialty despite having only a small number of offices.

 For example, Robinson Bradshaw in North Carolina—which does M&A, commercial litigation and antitrust work—has only three offices but boasts international clients including Verizon Communications. 

And the firms’ list includes new entrants like bankruptcy firm Bassi Edlin of San Francisco, founded 10 years ago, corporate governance firm Bingham Greenbaume Doll (2011)

Of Interest



Judge Judy Facts on LawFuel.com


LawFuel – News To Power Lawyers


Eye Doctor Group Settle Medicare & Medicaid Fraud Allegations With Eye-Watering Payment

Medicare fraud lawfuel

Eye Doctor Group, Physicians Pay $6.65 Million to Settle Allegations They Submitted Fraudulent Bills to Medicare and Medicaid

            LOS ANGELES – A Southern California-based ophthalmology group, its former CEO and several of its physicians have paid the United States and California $6.65 million to settle False Claims Act allegations that they defrauded public health care programs by billing for unnecessary eye exams, improperly waiving Medicare co-payments, and violating other regulations, the Justice Department announced today.

            Retina Institute of California Medical Group (RIC), is a medical partnership of ophthalmologists who specialize in the treatment of retinal diseases. RIC operates in multiple locations in Los Angeles, Orange and Riverside counties. On October 2, the RIC and several other defendants paid the United States $6,353,410 and paid California $296,590 pursuant to a settlement agreement.

The other defendants who participated in the settlement are:

·         Dr. Tom S. Chang, of Pasadena;

·         Tom S. Chang, M.D., Inc., a Pasadena-based company;

·         Dr. Michael A. Samuel, of Arcadia;

·         Dr. Michael J. Davis, also of Arcadia;

·         Brett Braun, former CEO of Retina Institute of California Medical Group;

·         California Eye and Ear Specialists, a Pasadena-based subsidiary of Trilogy Eye Medical Group Inc., a company for whom Chang and Samuel serve as senior executives; and

·         San Gabriel Ambulatory Surgery Center LP, a San Gabriel-based company.

            Between January 2006 and August 2017, the defendants allegedly violated the False Claims Act by submitting bogus claims to Medicare and Medicaid/Medi-Cal, according to a settlement agreement signed in this case. Medicare reimburses physicians for examining patients, paying more money as the medical exams performed increase in complexity. RIC personnel allegedly improperly billed public health programs by misclassifying simpler exams as being more complex, using billing codes normally used for patients with severe or emergency conditions.

            RIC and the other defendants also allegedly waived Medicare co-payments and deductibles without proper documentation of patients’ financial hardship, which was intended to induce referrals. The defendants allegedly also billed Medicare and Medicaid for medical services that weren’t performed, were unnecessary, not documented in the medical record or were not in compliance with applicable rules and regulations.

            The allegations were made in a whistleblower lawsuit filed in United States District Court by Bobbette A. Smith and Susan C. Rogers, who formerly worked for RIC as administrators, under the qui tam – or whistleblower – provisions of the False Claims Act. These provisions permit private individuals to sue on behalf of the government for false claims and to share in any recovery. The United States may intervene in the lawsuit, or, as in this case, the whistleblower may pursue the action. Smith and Rogers will receive a share of the settlement, but that amount has not yet been determined.

            The case, which was filed in May 2013 and unsealed in July 2016, was monitored by the United States Attorney’s Office, as well as the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services – Office of Inspector General.  

            The claims settled are allegations only and the defendants did not admit liability.

            The lawsuit is captioned United States, et al., ex rel. Smith and Rogers v. Tom S. Chang, M.D., et al., No. 13-3772-DMG (C.D.Cal.).

            Release No. 19-205

About The Author