In 2021 and 2022, BigLaw firms experienced unprecedented lateral hiring activity, driven by a surprisingly robust post-pandemic economy following a period of conservative hiring.

By contrast, 2023 and 2024 were cooler years for lateral activity, particularly in transactional law—the largest practice area. Rising interest rates slowed big transactions, which in turn impacted the demand for lateral associates in this space.

Now, as we look ahead to 2025, what trends can we anticipate?

Litigation and regulatory hiring will continue to be specific and steady.

When litigation and regulatory associates ask me, “Is the lateral hiring market hot or cold?” my response is always the same: “For you, it’s consistent.”

BigLaw’s lateral associate needs in these areas are often specific but steady, and I expect this trend to continue into 2025. Litigation, in particular, faces a perennial supply-and-demand imbalance: More entry-level associates want to be litigators than firms need. This dynamic allows firms to often fill a limited number of litigation vacancies without lateral hires, often by recruiting attorneys from judicial clerkships.

Regulatory hiring, on the other hand, operates differently. Regulatory practices are typically small and highly specialized. As a result, lateral hiring in these areas tends to be driven by very specific needs rather than broader trends.

Corporate hiring will gradually increase.

While corporate hiring is not expected to return to 2021 or 2022 levels, we can anticipate a slow but steady recovery in 2025. Current projections indicate only two or three interest rate cuts this year. For lateral hiring in corporate law to heat up, deal activity—particularly private equity-sponsored M&A—needs to rebound more significantly.

Private M&A thrives when money is cheaper and private equity firms can rely on leveraged finance. This type of deal activity generates substantial work for various transactional lawyers. Early indications for 2025 show a rise in openings for mid-level corporate associates, but a full resurgence in hiring will depend on greater deal market activity.

Mid-level associates will be in highest demand.

The most in-demand experience level for BigLaw lateral associates remains in the 3rd- to 5th-year range. While junior associates were also in high demand during the corporate hiring surge of 2021 and 2022, that trend is unlikely to return in a major way this year.

BigLaw firms continue to hire robust entry-level classes, leaving sufficient coverage for junior-level work. However, as workloads increase across various practice areas, firms will seek mid-level associates with some managerial experience who are still relatively cost-effective compared to senior associates.

Antitrust hiring will grow amid uncertainty.

The regulatory landscape for antitrust law is poised for significant changes, but much remains unclear about the specific impacts on lateral hiring. Will there be increased demand for antitrust regulatory attorneys? Possibly, but it depends on how the new administration reshapes the rules. Will antitrust litigators see fewer cases on behalf of corporations facing federal government scrutiny? Very possibly. And what about transactional advisory work in antitrust? This will largely depend on the resurgence of deal activity.

While growth in this area is likely, the exact nature of the demand will hinge on evolving regulations and economic conditions.

More firms will look for experience illustrated via deal sheets and matter lists.

Increasingly, BigLaw firms value detailed deal sheets and matter lists alongside resumes to assess whether a candidate’s experience aligns with their business needs. Even for junior litigation associates who have only worked on a few cases, providing a matter list can strengthen an application. Internal recruiters and hiring partners appreciate this additional layer of detail, which offers greater clarity about an associate’s expertise. (For more information on deal sheets, matter lists and other key application materials, see here.)

Litigation groups at BigLaw firms do not typically hire nearly as many lateral associates as transactional groups. However, as of the posting of this article, there are nearly 1,000 open litigation associate positions at AmLaw 200 firms (according to Firm Prospects). Like openings in other practices, these positions are more varied and flexible than associate openings at BigLaw firms have ever been in the past.

But if you're a litigation associate at a BigLaw firm, how do you decide whether a lateral move is right?

Here are some reasons to consider laterally as a litigation associate:

1. To sharpen your litigation practice focus. In my experience, this is probably the most popular reason for litigation associates to make a move. Most BigLaw firms start their litigation associates as "generalists" in their disputes or litigation groups. As time goes on, some firms retain this generalist approach while others have their litigation associates specialize in certain areas like white collar defense, employment or commercial litigation. If you are at a firm that takes a long-term generalist approach, it may make sense to move to one where you can specialize. This will be a particularly helpful move for certain types of in-house or government opportunities that you may consider later in your career.

2. To get more trial experience. For many BigLaw litigation associates, much of their time is not spent in or near a courtroom of any kind. Instead, the focus is on the discovery process, pleadings and working towards a settlement to avoid trial. Therefore, if you want to be the type of litigator where you advocate for clients in the courtroom and make oral arguments, a lateral move might make a lot of sense. Litigation boutiques in particular can offer this type of experience for litigation associates and many boutiques like to hire attorneys who are trained at the large BigLaw firms.

3. To shift your practice beyond traditional litigation. There are many firm opportunities out there right now that appreciate the experience that litigation associates bring to the table, but they offer a type of practice that is different from traditional litigation. Examples include restructuring openings for bankruptcy litigators; technology transactions roles for IP litigators; securities regulatory openings for white collar litigators; and data privacy and crypto regulatory associate positions for tech industry litigators. These types of opportunities may or may not exist at your current firm.

4. To strengthen your candidacy for competitive government positions. A lot of litigators at BigLaw firms look ahead to opportunities at government employers like the USDOJ and state attorney general offices. Major government prosecution offices like to hire from BigLaw firms because of the level of training and experience that BigLaw associates receive. However, given the level of interest in these openings, these employers can also be very picky about who they hire for their openings. (Their retention rates are quite high.) Therefore, a lateral move to a firm with a stronger reputation or deeper connections to certain government offices may make a lot of sense.

5. To increase your chances for partnership. Take a look at your BigLaw firm's recent partnership class announcement. What percentage of the new partners are litigators? Is it much less than the percentage of litigators at the firm as a whole? It is very hard to make partner at a BigLaw firm. But it can be especially hard for litigators. The receivables at many BigLaw firms lean heavily towards the transactional practice, and this trend is accelerating. As a result, in order to be in the best position possible to make partner as a litigator, a lateral move may be necessary to a firm with a larger and/or stronger litigation practice.

6. To get more flexibility in terms of where and when you are working. Litigation groups have not been as flexible in terms of remote work and hybrid work setups as other practice groups. Particularly if the practice is courtroom-facing, it can be difficult for partners in the group to make a good business cases to allow their associates to be remote. However, during the pandemic, this started to change. For litigation groups that do not involve much (or any) trial work, a remote or hybrid arrangement is very possible. You just have to be at the right firm in the right group with the right opportunity for it to be possible.

7. To change the types of people with whom you work with and for. BigLaw litigation practice groups have very distinct personalities firm-to-firm (and sometimes within a firm). When a case is active, the demands are high. Different partners and attorneys react in different ways to the high-pressure nature of an active case. If you feel as though you are not meshing with the attorneys in your current litigation practice, a lateral move may make sense.

8. To relocate. A final common reason to make a lateral move is to relocate. Even if your firm has an office in your new destination, will that office be right for your litigation practice? Maybe the firm will allow you to relocate even if there are no litigators in the new office, but maybe you would rather work with your team in person and on the ground. That means that you should make a lateral move. For example, maybe you started at your firm's DC office and they are willing to let you relocate to Boston to be closer to family. But the Boston office of this particular firm does not have any litigators. If you are shifting your career in the long-term to Boston, it probably makes sense to move to a firm that has litigators in Boston.

A recent article in the Financial Times discusses the increase in demand for “business crime” lawyers in the US and UK over the past decade. In the US, “white collar” attorneys are concentrated in the New York and Washington, DC markets due to the focus on the financial industry and federal regulation, respectively.

Only 99 white-collar specific positions were posted in NY and DC between 2015 and 2018, according to data from Firm Prospects, LLC.

This represents just 10% of the total litigator job postings in NY and DC during the same period. This does not necessarily mean that white collar is not a “hot” practice area. The relatively low number is probably the result of a couple factors:

• A lot of white collar attorney positions aren’t posted. Firms in NY and DC typically desire experienced white collar attorneys with government or regulatory experience (e.g., US Attorney’s Offices, the DOJ, the SEC, etc.). White collar litigators at firms interact with attorneys at these government agencies frequently enough that it may be easy to identify candidates through referrals, thus making a job posting unnecessary.

• Some firms may hire “general litigators” to do white collar work as part of their practice. Some firms may not be able to rely on white collar work on its own to support their litigation practice. Therefore anyone hired to do white collar work may also practice in other types of litigation and regulatory work.