Research reveals what lawyers earn

March 10, 2011
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Ever wonder how much money attorneys in Hamilton County, Ind., or Hamilton County, N.Y., make? Now you can find out, thanks to research by the ABA Journal and William D. Henderson of the Center on the Global Legal Profession at Indiana University Maurer School of Law.

Using salary data and U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics on employed lawyers, the publication has created a handy map and breaks down county by county of the mean, and median wage per year, the number of lawyers employed in the area, and other data. Keep in mind that the data doesn’t include equity partners or solo practitioners. Check out the article for specifics and information on where lawyers earn the most or where law firm payrolls are the largest (Spoiler Alert: Indiana’s not on either list).

If you just glance at the map of the U.S., you can see where attorneys on average earn more, and it’s mostly markets you would expect – New York City; northern and southern California; Chicago; Washington, D.C.

Indiana attorneys make anywhere from $40,820 to $125,000, depending on where you live, according to the map. More populated areas like central Indiana and northwestern Indiana typically have attorneys making more than those who live in less populated areas. In Marion County, the mean wage per year is $105,999; the median wage per year is $95,030, with 3,250 attorneys employed in the Indianapolis-Carmel area. In Lake County, the mean wage per year is $92,390, and the median wage per year is $72,080 with 670 attorneys employed in the Gary metropolitan region.

In Lawrence County, there are 230 attorneys in the area with the mean and median wage per year pretty similar at around $80,000. In Kosciusko County, there are 350 attorneys in the area with the mean wage per year at $65,130 and the median wage per year just under $50,000.

It’s pretty interesting to see each county broken down. You can check it out for yourself on the ABA Journal’s website. Are you surprised by the results of the research?

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  2. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  3. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

  4. I am the mother of the child in this case. My silence on the matter was due to the fact that I filed, both in Illinois and Indiana, child support cases. I even filed supporting documentation with the Indiana family law court. Not sure whether this information was provided to the court of appeals or not. Wish the case was done before moving to Indiana, because no matter what, there is NO WAY the state of Illinois would have allowed an appeal on a child support case!

  5. "No one is safe when the Legislature is in session."

ADVERTISEMENT