Cadwalader emphasises financial strength as merger speculation swirls

Cadwalader has highlighted its financial strength as merger rumours with Alston & Bird swirl, saying it remains confident in its standalone strategy.

Bloomberg Law reported earlier this week that Atlanta-based Alston & Bird is among the firms Cadwalader has approached to discuss a possible merger - a deal that, if completed, would create a firm with around 1,400 lawyers and roughly $2 billion in revenue, according to data from legal analytics platform Pirical.

What the firm said

While the firm did not comment directly on the Alston & Bird speculation, in a statement shared with Non-Billable a spokesperson said: "As every top firm does, we regularly evaluate our strategy to further capitalize on our market-leading strengths for our clients. We have been approached by many top-tier firms for years, and that continues."

The firm added that it is "in a very strong financial position" and expects to record one of the best years in its 233-year history, with revenue projected to top $600 million. It said it has added more than 75 lawyers this year, opened nearly 20% more new matters than during the same period last year and continues to win new clients.

Why it matters

A merger with Alston & Bird would make strategic sense. Both firms are known for their structured finance work, and a combination would help balance their platforms, strengthening Alston & Bird’s New York presence while giving Cadwalader greater weight in litigation.

It would also have implications in London, where both firms already have offices. Alston & Bird opened in the City in 2019 and now counts around 30 lawyers, including 13 partners, while Cadwalader has more than 60 lawyers and over 20 partners in the office it launched in 1997.

A tie-up would create another sizeable US-headquartered player in the City, coming on the heels of McDermott’s merger with Schulte, which created a 100-plus-lawyer London office.

Tough year, strong message

Cadwalader’s response follows a turbulent period marked by significant partner departures - including a 37-lawyer structured finance team on both sides of the Atlantic that joined Orrick in October in one of the most high-profile team moves of the year.

The firm was also among several that agreed deals with the Trump administration in April to fend off potentially damaging executive orders targeting Big Law, pledging at least $100 million in pro bono advice - a decision understood to have been controversial internally.

As you might expect, the firm’s public tone remains notably bullish - emphasising stability and financial strength rather than entertaining merger speculation.