Chicago Product Liability Hiring Runs Heavy on Partners

Sartori & Partners data show that a Chicago product liability partner lateral is a more common event than the practice or the city would suggest. Partners made 35.0% of the 60 product liability lateral moves into Chicago firms in the 12 months to October 2026. Across the practice market-wide the partner share was 27.3%, and across Chicago in all practices it was 26.8%. The tilt shows again in the index figures: product liability's share of Chicago's partner laterals stands at 195 against the market, while Chicago's share of the practice at every level stands at 146. For a firm planning its next product liability hire in Chicago, the competition is sharpest at the top of the bench, and the buyers are not the same firms that dominate the city's hiring overall.

In the Sartori & Partners lateral database, 21 of the Chicago product liability moves over 12 months were partners, 35.0% of the total. That is 7.7 points above the practice across all markets and 8.2 points above Chicago as a whole. Against the practice, the extra weight comes out of both lower tiers: counsel made 11.7% of the Chicago group, against 16.8%, and associates 53.3%, against 55.8%. Against the city, it comes out of associates, who made 61.6% of Chicago moves in all practices.

The longer window says the same. Over 3 years partners made 34.9% of Chicago product liability moves, against 28.1% for the practice and 28.1% for the city. A gap that holds across two windows is a feature of the market rather than a run of chance hires. The consequence is practical: a firm that wants a product liability partner in Chicago is shopping in a market where its rivals are shopping for the same tier, so the bench of movable partners is picked over more often than the practice average implies.

Product liability made 13.1% of all lateral partner moves into Chicago firms over 12 months, and 10.1% of Chicago's moves at every level. Set against the market, the partner figure gives an index of 195, on a scale where the whole market's share is par. Chicago's index on the practice at all levels is 146, so the partner reading runs 49 points higher. Chicago over-indexes on product liability in general, and it over-indexes much more when only partners are counted. The two figures are built on different bases, one on the city's partner moves and one on the practice's moves at every level, so read the gap as a direction rather than an exact margin. The direction is clear all the same: the city draws a heavier share of product liability partners than of product liability lawyers as a whole.

Of the six practices Chicago publishes at partner level, product liability carries the highest partner index. Private equity sits at 144 and employment at 151, while litigation, which accounts for far more partner moves, is close to the market at 104. For a hiring partner, this means Chicago is where product liability partners are traded unusually often: a search here will find candidates who have moved before and firms that expect to bid for them.

Firms of 1,000+ lawyers took 37.3% of Chicago product liability hires over 12 months, a little under the practice at 40.7% and far under Chicago as a whole at 51.2%. At the other end, firms under 150 lawyers took 18.6% of the group's hires, against 12.7% in the practice and 12.8% in the city. Firms of 150-399 lawyers took 23.7%, against 13.0% across Chicago.

This is not a one-year pattern either. Over 3 years firms of 1,000+ lawyers took 38.6% of the group's hires, against 48.4% for Chicago in all practices. The buying is also spread across many firms: 42 firms hired at least one product liability lawyer in Chicago over 12 months. A large Chicago firm recruiting a product liability partner should expect its offer to be weighed against offers from mid-size and smaller firms, and should prepare the case for its platform before the first meeting.

Sartori & Partners records name ten firms as the most active Chicago product liability hirers over 3 years, and together they took 36.2% of the group's individual hires. Clyde & Co ranks first, in the 6-10 band, and the first five names share that band. The list counts hires at every level and ranks individual hires only, so team moves sit outside it. Several of the names also appear among the most active product liability hirers across the practice, which tells a Chicago firm that the competition for local talent is often a multi-city platform with a Chicago office rather than a purely local rival. The work behind these moves is broad: product liability itself was the stated focus in 61.0% of the 3-year moves, premises and general liability in 36.6% and mass and toxic torts in 29.1%. A lawyer can carry several focuses, so these shares overlap. A firm building a bench should map these firms first, since they are the likeliest source of a counter-offer.

Plan a Chicago product liability partner search on the assumption that other firms are running the same search. Partners made 35.0% of the market's moves here, and Chicago's partner index of 195 says the city trades these partners far more than its size alone would explain. Three steps follow. First, move fast once a candidate is identified, because a partner who is open to a move here is likely to hear from more than one firm. Second, size the offer against the mid-size and smaller firms that make most of the hires, not only against the city's large platforms: firms of 1,000+ lawyers took just 37.3% of the group's hires. Third, if the partner tier is too contested, grow one: counsel made only 11.7% of local moves against 16.8% across the practice, so a counsel hired now and promoted later may cost less than a partner bought at the peak of the bidding.