Product Liability Work for Individuals in 2026: Sector Up, Hiring Flat

A general counsel who sends matters involving individuals and consumers to product liability law firms wants to know one thing first: is that bench getting busier? Sartori & Partners data give a split answer. Matters involving individuals and consumers rose 15.8% year on year, from 584 to 676 on settled 12-month windows. Over the same windows the product liability practice's own matter count held flat (+0.2%), from 887 to 889, and lateral partner hiring into the practice held flat (-5.0%), from 282 to 268 partners. The sector and the practice met on 140 matters in the 12 months to October 2026. What follows sets the sector's rise against the practice's level readings, then covers what the work is, how large it runs, where it is done and which firms carry volume in it.

Each reading belongs with its own counts. In the Sartori & Partners deal records, matters involving individuals and consumers rose 15.8%, from 584 in the 12 months to September 2025 to 676 in the 12 months to September 2026. The whole deal record rose 10.6% over the same windows, from 43,590 to 48,216, so the sector moved faster than the market. Product liability matters held flat (+0.2%), from 887 to 889. The practice's total followed neither the sector nor the market.

The lateral market points the same way for the practice. Lateral partner hiring into product liability held flat (-5.0%), from 282 to 268 partners, and moves at every level held flat (+2.3%), from 959 to 981. Lateral moves count lawyers changing firms, not the size of any firm's team, but they are the clearest public sign of how hard firms compete for experienced people. In product liability that competition is level while the sector's matter count climbs.

One reading does move. Lawyers whose own focus is individuals and consumers changed firms more often: their lateral moves rose 27.7%, from 173 to 221. For a general counsel the mix matters: more matters in the sector, a steady flow of product liability partners between firms, and more movement among the lawyers closest to this client base. Confirm who will staff a matter when it is placed, and check at each annual review that the partner you instructed is still at the firm you pay.

The overlap can be read from both ends. Sartori & Partners records put 140 matters in both the product liability practice and the individuals and consumers sector over 12 months. Those matters are 14.1% of the practice's matters, against 1.4% for the sector across all dated deals, or 10.1 times the market rate. Seen from the sector, product liability lawyers worked on 21.3% of its matters, against 2.1% of all dated deals.

These shares overlap and are never added together. One matter can carry several practices: Public Law & Government lawyers also sit on 18.7% of the sector's matters. On the practice side, healthcare providers and payors appear on 12.3% of product liability matters, close to the individuals figure. Many matters carry no sector label at all, so the listed sectors describe part of the practice's work, not all of it. The point for a company is concentration: product liability lawyers appear on the sector's matters at 10.1 times their rate across all dated deals. Keep product liability counsel named on the panel, rather than routing these matters to whoever handles general litigation.

The work is contentious. Disputes and investigations account for 91.2% of matters involving individuals and consumers, against 25.0% of all dated deals. For the product liability practice the same share is 97.9%. Both figures sit far above the market, which mixes capital markets, M&A and finance work with its disputes. A mandate in this sector is a litigation mandate from the first letter.

Values are seldom public. A value was disclosed on 5.8% of the sector's matters and on 9.6% of the practice's. Where it was, the sector's median was $18.8 million and the practice's $15 million. The sector figure covers all of its matters, whatever the practice, so it is not a price for product liability work on individual matters; it shows the two sets of disclosed matters running at a similar scale. A median resting on a small disclosed minority is a rough size, not a budget. Reserve and fee planning should start from the count of matters, which rose in the sector, rather than from a single headline value.

The city figures show where the work is done. 26.1% of the sector's deals were handled with lawyers in Washington, DC, and 20.3% with lawyers in New York. Seattle comes next at 7.4%, ahead of London at 6.8% and Los Angeles at 5.8%. One deal counts in every city where its lawyers worked, so the shares overlap and are not summed.

Seattle also stands out on the hiring side of the practice, on a different measure. 2.2% of product liability lateral moves in the last 12 months joined firms in Seattle, a share that scores 199 on an index where the whole market's share scores one hundred. A company whose panel is built around New York should check that its product liability counsel can staff Washington and Seattle, where much of the sector's work is handled, and should ask for the names of the lawyers in those offices before the first matter arrives.

Sartori & Partners ranks firms by matters advised, shown as bands. Two lists apply here and they measure different things: the sector's list covers all matters involving individuals and consumers, whatever the practice, and the practice's list covers all product liability matters, whatever the sector. No list exists for the overlap of the two. Counted name by name, two firms sit on both. Irwin Mitchell ranks 1st on the sector's list and 7th on the practice's list, in the 21-40 band on both. Stewarts ranks 3rd on the sector's list and 9th on the practice's, in the 11-20 band on both.

The practice's list is headed by Wheeler Trigg O'Donnell in the 101-150 band, with Cole Scott & Kissane next in the 41-60 band. The sector's list starts lower, at the 21-40 band, so no single firm carries a block of the sector's matters on the scale seen in the practice.

Neither list says which side of a matter a firm was on, and a firm below the cut on one list may still do this work. For a general counsel, the two names on both lists are the firms with recorded volume in the sector and in the practice at once. The rest of each list is a starting point for conflict checks and for knowing which firms carry volume in this work, not a ranking of quality.

Book capacity early. Sartori & Partners figures show matters involving individuals and consumers rose 15.8% while product liability matters held flat (+0.2%) and lateral partner hiring into the practice held flat (-5.0%). Demand in the sector is moving faster than either practice reading, so agree staffing, response times and the named partner in the engagement letter, not after the first filing. Keep product liability counsel on the panel by name: its lawyers worked on 21.3% of the sector's matters. Plan for disputes, which are 91.2% of the sector's work, and test trial experience at the pitch. Check coverage in Washington, where lawyers handled 26.1% of the sector's deals, and in Seattle. Start a shortlist with the two firms on both lists above, then widen it from each list on its own terms. Budget on the number of matters, not on a median value disclosed for a small minority of them.