Partner Hiring vs Total Hiring by Practice: Where the Lines Split

Firms asking for the practices where partner lateral hiring is rising should not read the market total as a guide. Sartori & Partners data show partner hires across all practices rose 8.4%, 3,858 against 3,558 in the settled 12-month windows, almost exactly in line with all lateral moves, which rose 9.0%, 14,305 against 13,128. Underneath that agreement, five practices split the two lines apart. In projects and infrastructure, restructuring and financial services regulatory, partner hiring grew faster than the practice. In litigation and real estate, the practice grew while partner hiring did not.

At market level there is no partner story to tell. Partner hires and total moves rose by a similar margin, a gap of 0.6 points between the two growth rates. Both figures use 12-month windows that end one month before the newest data, because recent start dates are confirmed with a delay.

That parallel is what makes the practice figures useful. When the market moves as one, a practice whose partner line breaks from its own total is telling a hiring firm something specific about demand for senior lawyers in that field. A practice-level gap is not noise from the market: the market itself shows none.

For a firm setting a partner hiring plan, the practical step is to benchmark each practice against its own total, not against the market rate. A partner search in a practice where partner demand outran the practice will meet more competing offers than the headline number suggests.

Projects and infrastructure is the sharpest case in Sartori & Partners records. Projects partner hiring held flat (+16.5%), 212 against 182. Projects hiring at every level held flat (+1.3%), 537 against 530. Moves other than partner hires came to 325 in the settled window against 348 the year before, so partners account for all of the practice's growth.

The shift shows in the partner proportion. Partners made up 39.5% of projects moves in the settled window, up from 34.3% a year earlier. The calendar view agrees: projects partner hires reached 208 in 2025 against 131 in 2024, and 2026 already shows 179 with two months still to be counted.

Projects moves at all levels concentrate in a few hubs. Houston's share of projects moves carries an index of 409 against the market, where the market's own share is the baseline, and London's index is 147. Firms of 1,000+ lawyers took 71.1% of projects moves, against 53.6% across the market.

For a firm building a projects bench, this is a partner market with no matching rise in junior supply. Expect large firms in Houston and London to be bidding for the same partners, and plan to grow associate capacity from within rather than through laterals.

Restructuring and insolvency rose at both levels, but not at the same speed. Restructuring partner hires rose 21.1%, 287 against 237, while restructuring moves at every level rose 10.0%, 702 against 638. Calendar 2026, still partial, already counts 257 restructuring partner hires against 253 in the whole of 2025.

Financial services regulatory shows the same gap on a much smaller base. Partner hiring in the practice rose 40.2%, 115 against 82, against total financial services regulatory moves that rose 19.6%, 244 against 204. With partner counts this size, a few team moves can swing the rate, so read the direction rather than the exact figure.

Technology, data and privacy sits in the same group: partner hires rose 44.4% while practice moves rose 32.6%. Where the work is done matters for sourcing: New York's share of restructuring moves has an index of 165, and Washington, DC indexes at 268 for financial services regulatory.

In these practices, partner candidates hold the stronger hand. A firm that wants a restructuring or regulatory partner should expect a shortlist that other firms are also calling, and should have the business case approved before the first meeting.

The two largest practices in this comparison ran the opposite way. In the Sartori & Partners lateral database, litigation and disputes moves rose 7.5%, 5,679 against 5,281, while litigation partner hiring held flat (+0.9%), 1,505 against 1,492. Moves other than partner hires rose from 3,789 to 4,174, which carried the practice's growth on their own.

Real estate shows the same split more sharply. Real estate moves rose 7.9%, 1,520 against 1,409. Real estate partner hiring held flat (-8.6%), 435 against 476. Partners fell to 28.6% of real estate moves in the settled window, from 33.8% a year earlier, as moves other than partner hires went from 933 to 1,085.

Neither practice shows partner hiring in retreat: both partner lines are flat, not falling. The demand that grew was for associates and counsel. For a firm, that changes the shape of the search. A litigation or real estate partner hire meets steady competition and leaves room to be selective on portable business and fit, while associate searches in the same practices face more rival offers than a year ago.

Set partner budgets by practice, not by the market line. Market partner hires rose 8.4%, but that average sits between projects partner hiring, which held flat (+16.5%), and litigation partner hiring, which held flat (+0.9%).

Three moves follow. First, open projects, restructuring and financial services regulatory partner searches early and price them for competition: in each, partner demand grew faster than the practice around it. Second, in litigation and real estate, use the flat partner market to hold out for the right candidate, and move faster on associates and counsel, where Sartori & Partners data place the growth. Third, review these splits each quarter, since a practice can move from one group to the other within a year.