Account

Sign in to access your account and subscription

Selling a Law Practice: Prospects and Pitfalls

Large firms have long had well-defined methods for transferring ownership interests in a practice via "mergers," "retirements," "breakups," etc. Attorneys in larger firms have also always had mechanisms in place that provided them and their heirs with funding for the value of their individual interests in the firm. By contrast, the outright "sale" of a law practice from one attorney to another was prohibited for decades. In 1991, however, the ABA dropped its opposition. California had already permitted such sales since 1989, and more states have now followed suit; so the mechanisms for selling a practice have been developing, albeit slowly. These changes are economically vital for small-firm and sole practitioners. Many of these attorneys tend to conclude their law practice without any transfer of ownership, by just closing their office doors one day and never returning. By doing so, an attorney forgoes "cashing in" on a valuable asset that has taken many years to build. That no longer has to happen. Like their counterparts in large firms, sole and small-firm practitioners ' and their heirs ' can now reap the rewards of years of effort. This levels the economic playing field for retirement and estate planning.

25 minute readNovember 01, 2003 at 02:48 PM
By
Edward Poll
Selling a Law Practice: Prospects and Pitfalls

[Ed. Note: The author is now putting finishing touches on a timely new book-with-CD publication, tentatively titled How to Buy, Sell, Merge or Close a Law Practice.

This premium content is locked for Accounting and Financial Planning for Law Firms subscribers only

ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN Accounting and Financial Planning for Law Firms

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

Already have an account? Sign In Now

For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.

NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2026 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.

Continue Reading

Letter Agreement Between Landlord and Tenant Did Not Extinguish GuarantyTreble Damage Award Upheld; Landlord Failed to Establish Overcharge Was Not WillfulDenying Access to Landlord Constituted Breach Entitling Landlord to PossessionTenant Entitled to Yellowstone Injunction With Respect to Taxes and Sewer Charges

March 01, 2026

New York is one of the first states to adopt laws to regulate artificial intelligence use in advertising and to strengthen post-mortem publicity rights regarding AI-generated replicas and “synthetic performers.” Given the state’s role as a bellwether for consumer-protection and advertising regulation, these new laws, combined with the state’s broader AI legislative framework, represent a shift toward transparency, consent and accountability.

March 01, 2026

State app store age verification regimes do more than reallocate responsibility between platforms and developers. They create a new data supply chain for age knowledge, one that can move COPPA questions from “do we ask age?” to “what do we do when the platform tells us?” The teams that handle this best will treat platform age signals as sensitive compliance inputs: minimize them, tightly control where they flow, and design product behavior so that minors do not trigger unnecessary collection or disclosure.

March 01, 2026

The firms leading right now chose to ask what would become possible if they managed the entire revenue lifecycle — from invoice generation to cash receipt — in one place, and what AI could actually accomplish with complete data instead of partial feeds. That is the Power of One.

March 01, 2026

A recent decision from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (SDNY), United States v. Heppner, has generated outsized commentary suggesting that the use of generative AI tools may jeopardize attorney-client privilege. A closer reading shows something far less dramatic.

March 01, 2026