Getting $100M in the bank via a big law career Forum

[Anonymous User]

I am wondering whether people have considered how attainable it is to earn $100 million in career earnings in big law. My intuition is that you have to be very lucky. There's the idea that you could become an equity partner at your firm and hope that the PEP amount rises to a double-digit number so that in 10+ years, you will have made $100 million. Alternatively, you could join a startup or found one that quadruples from its initial valuation, and all of a sudden, you're left with a hundred million dollars worth of stock. Or you could become the head lawyer for a large financial institution like Coleman Sacks or JPMorgan. But outside of those things I think it's quite hard to touch $100 million as a corporate lawyer, does anyone else have thoughts on this?

[soft blue]

I am wondering whether people have considered how attainable it is to earn $100 million in career earnings in big law. My intuition is that you have to be very lucky. There's the idea that you could become an equity partner at your firm and hope that the PEP amount rises to a double-digit number so that in 10+ years, you will have made $100 million. Alternatively, you could join a startup or found one that quadruples from its initial valuation, and all of a sudden, you're left with a hundred million dollars worth of stock. Or you could become the head lawyer for a large financial institution like Coleman Sacks or JPMorgan. But outside of those things I think it's quite hard to touch $100 million as a corporate lawyer, does anyone else have thoughts on this?

It is obviously extremely hard, but not inconceivable. (Which is very different from even ten years ago.) I think that regarded but not top-top-tier rainmakers can pull $10mm plus. The $20mm package has absolutely happened for folks at the top of their game. Question becomes lifestyle creep, personal investment results, whether firm economics go south, etc.

[Lacepiece23]

I am wondering whether people have considered how attainable it is to earn $100 million in career earnings in big law. My intuition is that you have to be very lucky. There's the idea that you could become an equity partner at your firm and hope that the PEP amount rises to a double-digit number so that in 10+ years, you will have made $100 million. Alternatively, you could join a startup or found one that quadruples from its initial valuation, and all of a sudden, you're left with a hundred million dollars worth of stock. Or you could become the head lawyer for a large financial institution like Coleman Sacks or JPMorgan. But outside of those things I think it's quite hard to touch $100 million as a corporate lawyer, does anyone else have thoughts on this?

Probably easier to do as a personal injury lawyer but it can be done either way. The problem with law is that it’s pretty hard to continue making that amount of money without putting in an insane number of hours.

[Mr. Jones]

If you want that kind of money, don't be a big law lawyer. That's a safe job or you'll make plenty of money. Be a really good personal injury lawyer and land some big trials. Pull a $50 million dollar verdict against Starbucks for a burn? Your 20 million contingency is pretty good.

That said, most BigLaw attorneys can't try a case like that.

[Chapter Eleven]

If you want that kind of money, don't be a big law lawyer. That's a safe job or you'll make plenty of money. Be a really good personal injury lawyer and land some big trials. Pull a $50 million dollar verdict against Starbucks for a burn? Your 20 million contingency is pretty good.

That said, most BigLaw attorneys can't try a case like that.

Just run two parallel scenarios including all the main variables (and the probability of each step happening), and estimate the overall chance of reaching $100M through PI vs. biglaw. Given how many PI attorneys out there because of this mindset, my educated guess is that biglaw is a bit more doable (noting that both are still at less than 1%).

[Lacepiece23]

If you want that kind of money, don't be a big law lawyer. That's a safe job or you'll make plenty of money. Be a really good personal injury lawyer and land some big trials. Pull a $50 million dollar verdict against Starbucks for a burn? Your 20 million contingency is pretty good.

That said, most BigLaw attorneys can't try a case like that.

Just run two parallel scenarios including all the main variables (and the probability of each step happening), and estimate the overall chance of reaching $100M through PI vs. biglaw. Given how many PI attorneys out there because of this mindset, my educated guess is that biglaw is a bit more doable (noting that both are still at less than 1%).

I’ve done biglaw and do plaintiffs work. I know multiple PI attorneys worth this much. I know no biglaw attorneys.

[soft blue]

Curious, how? My uninformed opinion is that slip-and-fall is a volume game and if you're John Morgan (or his local equivalent) it prints for you but most cases are no-to-low value. Is it something more statutory (wage & hour, antitrust plaintiff, false claims act whistleblower)? Med mal fatalities? Asbestos / talc / enormous class torts? The guy talking about the $50mm Starbucks burn case seems facially unserious.

[Lacepiece23]

Curious, how? My uninformed opinion is that slip-and-fall is a volume game and if you're John Morgan (or his local equivalent) it prints for you but most cases are no-to-low value. Is it something more statutory (wage & hour, antitrust plaintiff, false claims act whistleblower)? Med mal fatalities? Asbestos / talc / enormous class torts? The guy talking about the $50mm Starbucks burn case seems facially unserious.

Not sure if this was directed to me. But generally speaking PI does better than biglaw at all parallel levels. For example, let’s say you’re looking at the very top, Tom Kline, Mark Lanier, John Morgan, Nick Rowley, and the list keeps going, makes dwarf top biglaw partners. They are clearing much more than 20 mil a year or at least on average over a few years.

As for the next realistic tier, the biglaw partners making around a million, I’d bet you there are many more PI attorneys making this amount than the equivalent amount of biglaw partners. I know because although I do employment law and don’t make that much, these are my friends and I’m frequently talking with them about how much they make.

They can make this doing volume slip and fall or taking on more complex cases.

I know associates at top med mal shops that clear close to a million.

You can make good money from catastrophic injuries, med mal, product defect, mass torts, etc. class action attorneys also obviously do well too, but I don’t know as many in that world.


The biggest lie is that biglaw is the best way to make a lot of money doing litigation. For transactional, yeah, it’s usually necessary to go that route.

[soft blue]

Not sure I agree with your post. The top fifty-ish biglaw partners comp by comp are pulling in $20-$30mm range. (e.g. it was publicly reported recently that the head debt workout guys at both Simpson and Kirkland make this much, along with public reporting says the co-head of Gibson's litigation group makes more). It makes sense to me that a John Morgan-type - someone who founds and essentially owns (as I understand it) a huge national law firm - would pull more than those types.

Not sure what the million-a-year tier looks like; I think that's the first year partner tier at every AmLaw 20. It's no longer crazy for a well-regarded young rainmaker who is very much not top of the totem pole to get $7mm+ offers.

I don't know much about PI but I think saying that it's strictly better on comp at all parallel levels is just obviously wrong. Juniors are the obvious example. Do the top PI firms (not like Susman, etc., that do plaintiffs' work) pay biglaw market for junior or midlevel associates? No way. That said, it would not shock me if, outside, like, the top ~10 legal markets, a successful PI attorney makes more money than a successful deal lawyer or defense lawyer.

[Lacepiece23]

Not sure I agree with your post. The top fifty-ish biglaw partners comp by comp are pulling in $20-$30mm range. (e.g. it was publicly reported recently that the head debt workout guys at both Simpson and Kirkland make this much, along with public reporting says the co-head of Gibson's litigation group makes more). It makes sense to me that a John Morgan-type - someone who founds and essentially owns (as I understand it) a huge national law firm - would pull more than those types.

Not sure what the million-a-year tier looks like; I think that's the first year partner tier at every AmLaw 20. It's no longer crazy for a well-regarded young rainmaker who is very much not top of the totem pole to get $7mm+ offers.

I don't know much about PI but I think saying that it's strictly better on comp at all parallel levels is just obviously wrong. Juniors are the obvious example. Do the top PI firms (not like Susman, etc., that do plaintiffs' work) pay biglaw market for junior or midlevel associates? No way. That said, it would not shock me if, outside, like, the top ~10 legal markets, a successful PI attorney makes more money than a successful deal lawyer or defense lawyer.

In my market the top 5 PI firms pay more than biglaw for many associates and less for others. It’s less uniform because plaintiffs work depends on effectiveness not hours.

The next tier of PI firms probably pay more than the lower fault firms as well.

If you own a firm of more than 5 attorneys which most PI lawyers do, I’d expect that person to make a million a year.


The salaries you’re talking about are pretty contained to NYC at top 20 amlaw firms. I’m talking about many firms around the country.

[soft blue]

Definitionally, "most PI lawyers" don't own a firm of more than 5 attorneys.

To play this out for a sec, how do you imagine a PI firm allocates cash? The folk wisdom is that biglaw spends 1/3rd of revenue on each of the partners, all other employees, and "all other" (rent, business development, etc). So if you have the owner of the firm making $1 million, that gets you to $200k per associate (which isn't straight salary - need to factor in benefits). That means that the average total comp per associate at this PI firm is worse than the average first year salary in biglaw. And say that the average biglaw lawyer is a third year associate (not sure that's true but that's what I have in my head - that's ~$340k of salary vs. $200k of total comp).

None of this is a comment on the merits of either side of the line (and I'm obviously biased as a biglaw person). But your comment that "generally speaking PI does better than biglaw at all parallel levels" just simply is not right.

[Lacepiece23]

Definitionally, "most PI lawyers" don't own a firm of more than 5 attorneys.

To play this out for a sec, how do you imagine a PI firm allocates cash? The folk wisdom is that biglaw spends 1/3rd of revenue on each of the partners, all other employees, and "all other" (rent, business development, etc). So if you have the owner of the firm making $1 million, that gets you to $200k per associate (which isn't straight salary - need to factor in benefits). That means that the average total comp per associate at this PI firm is worse than the average first year salary in biglaw. And say that the average biglaw lawyer is a third year associate (not sure that's true but that's what I have in my head - that's ~$340k of salary vs. $200k of total comp).

None of this is a comment on the merits of either side of the line (and I'm obviously biased as a biglaw person). But your comment that "generally speaking PI does better than biglaw at all parallel levels" just simply is not right.

I’m saying something completely different. I’m comparing more elite PI to biglaw. There are thousands of PI attorneys and defense attorneys not in biglaw. I’m comparing the elite of the defense side (biglaw) with the elite on the PI side (about the same amount of firms in any given market). What I’m saying is that there probably isn’t that much difference, and the partners are probably doing better on average than in biglaw.

For example, in Philly, I know multiple PI lawyers for 100m and up and who routinely make 10-20 mil most likely. I doubt there are as many biglaw partners that make this comp.

In NYC, sure, biglaw partners are making 10-30 mil at some places. I don’t think there are that many of them. But the same is true for biglaw partners.

In the end, plaintiffs work is more of a black box. I’ve done both sides. I think that there are more PI lawyers clearing 1 mil overall than biglaw partners. The finest lawyers in the country are PI lawyers, not biglaw lawyers.

Tom Kline, Mark Lanier, John Morgan, Nick Rowley, Willie Gary, are just a few that I think have all reach 1 billion or close. Don’t know of any biglaw partners that have touched that.

[soft blue]

I feel like you must be trolling me.

For example, in Philly, I know multiple PI lawyers for 100m and up and who routinely make 10-20 mil most likely. I doubt there are as many biglaw partners that make this comp.

I mean ... source? The type of person who tells you, spontaneously, that they're worth nine figures ... might be exaggerating? The 3 biglaw partners I know personally who are making (per public reports) north of $20mm / year would never, ever disclose their personal financials so casually. Going to suggest that "my buddy told me he is worth $100 million" does not, in fact, mean that he's worth $100 million.

The finest lawyers in the country are PI lawyers, not biglaw lawyers.

Facially goofy. There are undoubtedly excellent plaintiffs' firm trial lawyers and terrible defense bar trial lawyers. But "all the best lawyers do my kind of law and play for my team" is an embarrassing thing to say. The house view is that Bill Savitt isn't one of the "finest" lawyers (biglaw and not doing anything related to personal injury)? Lisa Blatt (same)? Liz Prelogar (government, not related to PI)? Be serious.

Tom Kline, Mark Lanier, John Morgan, Nick Rowley, Willie Gary, are just a few that I think have all reach 1 billion or close. Don’t know of any biglaw partners that have touched that.

A bit bold to declare these guys worth $1bn (again, any sourcing?), but agree that the founders of nationwide law firms, presumably who retain a huge percentage of the equity (Kline, Lanier, Morgan), are going to be wealthier than even the most successful biglaw partners. Just a different business model given repeat clients in biglaw are the bread and butter, and they'll follow their relationship partner (vs how I imagine plaintiffs' injury works, where even a very important / senior person leaving is starting from scratch).

I’m comparing more elite PI to biglaw.

I'm not sure what "more elite PI" means. I think biglaw can be defined as firms that pay NYC market to all associates through year 5 and have > 100 nonequity attorneys, the lack of an objective standard kind of lets you say whatever you want.

Anyways, my point here is not that PI can't be financially rewarding or all the best attorneys are in biglaw or whatever. Just that, if you are reading this forum as an impressionable 1L choosing between biglaw (as defined above) and plaintiffs' work, you should not presume that plaintiffs' work, as you put it "does better than biglaw at all parallel levels." That said, though, the work is strikingly different in almost every respect - not just compensation! - and it is hard to imagine a person doing equally well on both sides of the V. One will fit you better.

[Lacepiece23]

I feel like you must be trolling me.

For example, in Philly, I know multiple PI lawyers for 100m and up and who routinely make 10-20 mil most likely. I doubt there are as many biglaw partners that make this comp.

I mean ... source? The type of person who tells you, spontaneously, that they're worth nine figures ... might be exaggerating? The 3 biglaw partners I know personally who are making (per public reports) north of $20mm / year would never, ever disclose their personal financials so casually. Going to suggest that "my buddy told me he is worth $100 million" does not, in fact, mean that he's worth $100 million.

The finest lawyers in the country are PI lawyers, not biglaw lawyers.

Facially goofy. There are undoubtedly excellent plaintiffs' firm trial lawyers and terrible defense bar trial lawyers. But "all the best lawyers do my kind of law and play for my team" is an embarrassing thing to say. The house view is that Bill Savitt isn't one of the "finest" lawyers (biglaw and not doing anything related to personal injury)? Lisa Blatt (same)? Liz Prelogar (government, not related to PI)? Be serious.

Tom Kline, Mark Lanier, John Morgan, Nick Rowley, Willie Gary, are just a few that I think have all reach 1 billion or close. Don’t know of any biglaw partners that have touched that.

A bit bold to declare these guys worth $1bn (again, any sourcing?), but agree that the founders of nationwide law firms, presumably who retain a huge percentage of the equity (Kline, Lanier, Morgan), are going to be wealthier than even the most successful biglaw partners. Just a different business model given repeat clients in biglaw are the bread and butter, and they'll follow their relationship partner (vs how I imagine plaintiffs' injury works, where even a very important / senior person leaving is starting from scratch).

I’m comparing more elite PI to biglaw.

I'm not sure what "more elite PI" means. I think biglaw can be defined as firms that pay NYC market to all associates through year 5 and have > 100 nonequity attorneys, the lack of an objective standard kind of lets you say whatever you want.

Anyways, my point here is not that PI can't be financially rewarding or all the best attorneys are in biglaw or whatever. Just that, if you are reading this forum as an impressionable 1L choosing between biglaw (as defined above) and plaintiffs' work, you should not presume that plaintiffs' work, as you put it "does better than biglaw at all parallel levels." That said, though, the work is strikingly different in almost every respect - not just compensation! - and it is hard to imagine a person doing equally well on both sides of the V. One will fit you better.

I don’t really feel like responding to all of this because I’m on my phone. A few points. It’s pretty easy to figure out how much PI lawyers make, all you have to do is look at their biggest verdicts and x .40. Sure, many are remitted. But it’s easy to get a general sense.

Next, lawyers getting big verdicts and settlements are not necessarily concentrated in NYC. There are many PI friendly markets outside of the flagship biglaw spots. That’s important to remember when you think about the amount of highly paid PI lawyers v Biglaw lawyers. If we’re comparing say the 1 million+ band, I still stand by there being more PI lawyers than Biglaw lawyers that make this amount.

And my point was that at each general level of comp, I think there are more PI lawyers than Biglaw lawyers making that amount.

I stand by the best lawyers in the country being PI lawyers. I consider lawyers that trial cases to be the best lawyers. Some may feel differently. That’s fine. But the best trial lawyers are PI lawyers. There are some great criminal defense and biglaw trial lawyers, but they are few and far between. I like things I can measure, and you can measure wins, losses, and the size of verdicts at trial.

As far as plaintiff’s work is concerned, you’re much more likely to stay with it than biglaw. Most of my classmates are in house. Most of my fellow plaintiffs lawyers make more money 11 years’ out than my Ivy League classmates. It is what it is.

[soft blue]

I don't follow your numbers. You're saying the PI firm's revenue is 40% of its verdicts. (Defer to you on what the usual contingency fees are.) Profits are going to be significantly less. Presuming (i) the biglaw revenue split (i.e. a third each to partner comp, non-partner comp, and everything else (advertising, rent, etc)), (ii) a pass-through tax rate of 30%, and (iii) no other partners, 9.3% of revenue (i.e. settlements/verdicts) ends up in the partner's pocket - a bit less than a quarter of your estimate. So to pull $1 million a year, you need a bit more than $10.5 million of revenue. Some googling suggests that the median wrongful death case settles at around half a million. How many folks are dying from torts in the US a year?

[Lacepiece23]

I don't follow your numbers. You're saying the PI firm's revenue is 40% of its verdicts. (Defer to you on what the usual contingency fees are.) Profits are going to be significantly less. Presuming (i) the biglaw revenue split (i.e. a third each to partner comp, non-partner comp, and everything else (advertising, rent, etc)), (ii) a pass-through tax rate of 30%, and (iii) no other partners, 9.3% of revenue (i.e. settlements/verdicts) ends up in the partner's pocket - a bit less than a quarter of your estimate. So to pull $1 million a year, you need a bit more than $10.5 million of revenue. Some googling suggests that the median wrongful death case settles at around half a million. How many folks are dying from torts in the US a year?

Numbers are off by a lot. An average solo PI lawyer might expect to do a million in revenue. To be fair, they are probably paying referral fees, so bring that down to say 650k. Overhead probably around 100k, profit around 550k. Number that’s out there is that PI solo attorneys average around 500k.

Now let’s take the more complex example. Shop with two or three partners, 20 attorneys. I’d expect like 10 million revenue. A healthy shop as an s corp does 20-30% profit, so that’s 2-3 mil, 1 mil per partner.

Wrongful death cases aren’t the most valuable PI cases. The decent doesn’t have future meds. I’m not a PI lawyer, I do employment, I’m just speaking from general knowledge and dabbling. But I talk to a ton of PI attorneys about numbers in masterminds and business owner type things.

Now, let’s take the examples that I’d compare to biglaw. Firms that specialize in only catostropic, significant marketing budgets, high end work, well, they are seeing a few 8 figure settlements a year, tons of 7 figure settlements, not crazy to do 20-100 mil in revenue a year.

Partners there are doing more like 2-5 mil a year.

Yeah, a lot of this is not publicly available. But either is equity comp at the lower v50 where I also have knowledge that the median equity partner is pulling less than a mil. Averages are pulled up by the few rainmakers.

The thing that biglaw and PI have in common is that equity rainmakers, well, make it rain and are paid accordingly. My point through all of this is that I personally think there are more PI lawyers out there at that 1-2 mil range then biglaw partners. There are more at the 2-5 mil range, and more at the 20 mil range. And there are not equity partners that are making 40-50 mil a year and up, to my knowledge.

But there are examples of Biglaw billionaires. The question in this thread was how to make 9 figures in law. My answer is PI. Maybe throw plaintiff class work in there too.

Edit: I’d also add that my 20 lawyer shop is extremely conservative. Fees per lawyer of only 500k is on the low end. A lot of shops expect 750k plus in fees per lawyer.

[soft blue]

Super interesting look into the economics - thanks.

For our solo - presuming the 40% contingency, to get $1 million of revenue is $2.5 million of settlements. That seems like a lot of cases to process every year, again: five wrongful death settlements a year, every year. And if every attorney could earn $550k owning their own business - why wouldn't they do that instead of working biglaw where that's a sixth year salary? (Plus, if you're adjusting for cost of living, that $550k probably goes a lot further outside NYC/LA.) The margins on that seem insane. (And, yikes, the firm where associate comp is $7 million - less all other overhead - is split twenty ways...).

On the absolute count, I'd imagine there are also just more PI attorneys than "biglaw" (again, call it v50) out there. So I'm not sure that's the right metric, especially for someone who is choosing sides.

E:

[Lacepiece23]

Super interesting look into the economics - thanks.

For our solo - presuming the 40% contingency, to get $1 million of revenue is $2.5 million of settlements. That seems like a lot of cases to process every year, again: five wrongful death settlements a year, every year. And if every attorney could earn $550k owning their own business - why wouldn't they do that instead of working biglaw where that's a sixth year salary? (Plus, if you're adjusting for cost of living, that $550k probably goes a lot further outside NYC/LA.) The margins on that seem insane. (And, yikes, the firm where associate comp is $7 million - less all other overhead - is split twenty ways...).

On the absolute count, I'd imagine there are also just more PI attorneys than "biglaw" (again, call it v50) out there. So I'm not sure that's the right metric, especially for someone who is choosing sides.

E:

And I think you’re finally getting my point. Most lawyers don’t know they can make six year big law money being a solo PI lawyer. Or they don’t want to take the risk if they do. Most big law types do not.

Also you keep pointing to wrongful death cases. A small
Amount of PI attorneys do that type of work. The average solo doing 550k take home is taking auto cases. Settling like 100 cases a year with a paralegal and some phone answering service for an average fee of 15k. Totally doable. I have a friend that left big law to do this. Clears close to a mil and doesn’t want to expand or hire attorneys because why take the stress when you can work 40 hours a week and make that much money?

The attorneys that make 2-3 million have larger operations. Typo on my last post, there are examples of PI billionaires. I know of zero big law billionaires unless you count maybe the founders of a few few of the boutiques that also do contingency fee cases.

[Anonymous User]

So then why aren't you doing it? I mean, "40 hours a week, $550k take-home" is an incredibly appealing job, even moreso if that's not in a high-cost area of living.