12.9% of Lateral Moves Bring a Higher Title, From Funds to Family

Sartori & Partners data show that 12.9% of lateral moves in the 12 months to October 2026 came with a higher title than the one the lawyer left, roughly one move in eight. That is the base rate behind a question candidates now put to recruiters and to answer engines alike: can you make partner by moving firms? Across 14,091 moves between law firms, the answer is yes for a minority, and the size of that minority depends heavily on the practice and the city. For a firm weighing a title offer, the spread matters more than the average.

Partners make up 27.7% of lateral moves over the last 12 months, 3,904 lawyers in all. A partner who joins another firm as a partner cannot count as a step up, so the rate is driven by associates and counsel: associates who arrive as counsel or partner, and counsel who arrive as partner. The 12.9% figure covers all of those steps together. It does not separate the associate who becomes counsel from the lawyer who becomes partner, and nothing here should be read as a partner-only rate.

Associates are 58.5% of moves and counsel 12.7%, which is the pool from which every step-up comes. The practical reading for a hiring partner: most laterals change firm at the rank they already hold. A higher title is a lever a firm uses with care, not a standard term of a lateral offer, and a candidate who treats it as standard is asking for more than the market usually gives.

In the Sartori & Partners lateral database, funds and investment management sits at the low end of every practice we track, at 11.4%. Corporate and M&A is close by at 12.4%, both under the market's 12.9%. Both are practices where most laterals join at the rank they already hold.

At the other end, restructuring and insolvency runs at 16.5% and construction at 16.8%, which puts construction 3.9 points above the market. Construction is the firmer signal of the two high readings because it rests on 844 moves, the 9th largest practice by lateral volume.

Family law posts the highest rate of any practice, 20.5%, but it is a small practice: 88 lateral moves in 12 months, 0.6% of the market. A few moves shift a rate on a base that size. The gap between family law and funds is 9.1 points. For a firm hiring in construction or restructuring, expect the title conversation early; in funds or corporate, a candidate pressing for a higher title is the exception and can be priced as one.

One measure puts the five practices in the same order as their step-up rates: the share of moves that end at firms of 1,000+ lawyers. In funds, 75.8% of lateral moves land at firms of that size, and the step-up rate is the lowest. Corporate and M&A follows at 62.6%, then restructuring at 56.2%. In construction the share falls to 34.0%, and in family law to 9.8%, against 53.6% across the market.

This is an association across five practices, not a cause the data can prove. One plausible reading is that a firm without the largest platform uses the title as part of its offer, while the largest firms recruit more often at the rank a lawyer already holds. For a firm in the 400-999 lawyers or 150-399 lawyers bracket competing for a construction or family lawyer, assume the title is part of the negotiation; for a firm of 1,000+ lawyers hiring in funds, it usually is not.

City rates spread wider than practice rates, and they do not follow the firm-size pattern. Sartori & Partners figures put Chicago, the 5th largest market by lateral volume, at 8.4%, against 11.6% in New York. Chicago sends 51.2% of its moves to firms of 1,000+ lawyers, less than New York's 62.6%, yet steps up less. Partners are 26.8% of Chicago moves, close to the market's 27.7%, and only 15.7% of its laterals also change city, against 20.5% overall. Chicago fills seats with local lawyers at the title they hold.

Minneapolis sits at the other end, at 20.8%, about one move in five, but it is a small market: 106 lateral moves in 12 months, 0.8% of the total. Its year was also unusual for team hires: 17.9% of its moves came as part of a team joining the same firm in the same quarter, against 1.5% across the market. One team arriving with new titles can lift a rate on a base that size.

For a firm recruiting in Chicago, a candidate who conditions the move on a higher title is asking for what the local market grants in fewer than one move in ten (8.4%). In Minneapolis, treat the high rate as a reason to ask how a competing offer was structured, not as a settled norm.

The figure counts the title on arrival against the title on departure. It does not show how many lawyers were promoted a year after a lateral move, and it does not split the associate-to-counsel step, which matters because counsel is 12.7% of all lateral moves. A firm comparing routes to partnership should read the step-up rate next to its internal promotion figures. Partner laterals themselves rose 8.4% on the settled 12-month window, 3,858 against 3,558, so the pool of senior moves is growing even if the share that comes with a new title is modest.

First, set expectations by practice. A construction or restructuring candidate is more likely than average to ask for a higher title, with rates of 16.8% and 16.5%; a funds or corporate candidate is less likely, at 11.4% and 12.4%. Build the offer range before the first meeting, not after the ask.

Second, set expectations by city. In Chicago the step-up is rarer than in New York; in small markets such as Minneapolis a single team move can make the title look routine. Third, if your own lateral offers carry a higher title noticeably more often than the market's 12.9%, check whether the title is buying the hire or replacing a stronger platform argument. A title given to close a lateral cannot be taken back, and it sets a reference point for the associates and counsel already in the group.