Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

In Florida, Holland now No.2 in size

A trade magazine now ranks a Miami law firm above Tampa's Holland & Knight.

By SCOTT BARANCIK
Published June 29, 2005

Among law firms based in Florida, Greenberg Traurig has long been Holland & Knight's richer, if smaller, rival.

It's no longer smaller. And its financial edge over Holland, which was founded in the Tampa Bay area, grew larger last year, according to an American Lawyer report on the country's 100 highest-grossing law firms. The trade magazine has published the results of its annual survey for more than a decade.

Thanks to a steady stream of cherry-picking from other firms in 2004, Greenberg ended the year with 1,149 full-time equivalent lawyers, a 20.7 percent growth spurt. Holland's headcount fell by six, to 1,155. The two ranked ninth and eighth nationwide, respectively, in terms of number of lawyers.

Meanwhile, Holland's relatively modest financial gains in 2004 caused it to lose some ground among its peers.

Though the firm's gross revenues rose 3.6 percent to $551-million, its growth rate was slower than average; Holland fell three spots in the national rankings to 27th. Greenberg Traurig's revenues rose 24.4 percent, pushing it up five notches to 15th.

In terms of revenues per lawyer, a measure that American Lawyer called "our proxy for a firm's success in the marketplace," Holland ranked 93rd, at $475,000, while Greenberg ranked 60th, at $620,000.

The magazine judged profitability by several measures. The most commonly used metric, profits per equity partner, showed Greenberg at $985,000, or more than twice Holland's figure of $450,000.

In another, new measure of profitability, Holland needed 47 lawyers to generate every $10-million in compensation for the firm's partners in 2004, the magazine said. Greenberg needed 34 lawyers.

Cesar Alvarez, Greenberg's Miami-based president and CEO, said he was pleased with the 2004 rankings but believes American Lawyer's rankings are problematic.

Having law firms report their finances on a cash basis rather than an accrual basis makes fast-growing firms like his appear less robust, he said. Comparing firms that operate mostly in high-priced cities like New York or Los Angeles to firms with offices in lower-priced areas is misleading.

Calculations of profits per equity partner also are flawed, he said, because there is no universal definition of "equity partners" and no one system for compensating them. Generally, equity partners own a percentage share of their firm, are compensated largely based on performance and have full voting rights on firm matters.

Nevertheless, Alvarez vowed to continue pursuing organic growth in the coming year, especially in the southern states and the Pacific Northwest.

"We definitely shy away from (mergers)," he said. "You may only want one-third of (the lawyers), and what are you going to do with the other two-thirds? That creates cultural problems."

Holland officials declined to comment Tuesday. In prior years, the firm has cited several reasons for its financial rankings, including mid level pricing for legal services, its presence in lower-cost markets and its lawyers' devotion to pro bono, or volunteer, work.

Among the 100 law firms in American Lawyer's survey, gross revenues grew an average of 10 percent in 2004, revenues per lawyer rose 8 percent and headcount grew 2 percent.

Revenues per lawyer ranged from a low of $330,000 at one firm to a high of $2,190,000.

Scott Barancik can be reached at barancik@sptimes.com or 727 893-8751.

Greenberg Traurig, a fast-growing Florida law firm, finally caught up in size last year to rival Holland & Knight.

Total Lawyers
Holland 1,155 (8th)
Greenberg 1,149 (9th)

Gross revenues
Holland $551-million (27th)
Greenberg $712-million (15th)

Revenues per lawyer
Holland $475,000 (93rd)
Greenberg $620,000 (60th)

Profit per equity partner
Holland $450,000 (97th)
Greenberg $985,000 (38th)

Source: American Lawyer. Rank among 100 top-grossing U.S. law firms shown in parentheses. Total lawyers based on full-time equivalent model.

[Last modified June 29, 2005, 11:25:32]