The new managing partner of Hartford’s Cantor Colburn is betting on early-career attorneys, competitive billing rates and an AI-driven patent boom to grow the firm’s national standing.
When
M. Brad Lawrence stepped into the
managing partner role at Cantor Colburn at the start of 2026, he didn’t envision a dramatic overhaul of the Hartford-based intellectual property law firm.
Instead, Lawrence said, his main priority was to take this “great big ship” — built over decades into a national leader — and keep it steady.
But that still leaves room for the firm to reposition itself for long-term growth amid intensifying competition.
Lawrence is leading efforts to recalibrate Cantor Colburn’s staffing model amid accelerating senior attorney retirements and intensifying post-pandemic competition for legal talent.
Rather than replacing departing partners with other veteran lawyers, the firm is expanding its pipeline of early-career attorneys and patent agents, whose work will be overseen by a smaller group of top-level attorneys. The goal is to increase capacity, standardize work product through centralized review and free senior lawyers to focus on high-level client relationships.
His overall goal is measured: increase billings by 10% over five years — growth he said would generate capital for reinvestment in technology, staffing and long-term stability.
“We could probably ride our careers out on the clients we have,” Lawrence said. “But that would mean getting smaller over time. I want to leave something bigger than I received.”
‘A good fit’
The shift comes after a leadership transition. Cantor Colburn, which specializes in patent, trademark and other intellectual property law, was built by its two namesakes,
Philmore H. Colburn II, who stepped down as managing partner at the close of 2025, and
Michael Cantor, who relinquished his co-managing partner role a year earlier.
Lawrence called them “extraordinary rainmakers” whose client relationships fueled the firm’s expansion into a national practice.
Under the firm’s 1999 partnership agreement, partners must step down and sell their equity stakes at age 65, creating room for advancement. Colburn, entering his final year as co-managing chair, initiated the election process last year and wanted a full year to train his successor.
There were multiple candidates. Colburn abstained from the vote, leaving the decision to the remaining partners. He said he was looking for someone who would inspire confidence across the partnership, keep the firm cohesive and provide the continuity clients expect.
“I spent many years working in the back of my mind on transition,” Colburn said. “We have a lot of large multinational clients that need stability. They need this to be seamless.”
Lawrence joined Cantor Colburn as a partner in 2008 and rose to co-chair the firm’s electrical engineering practice before taking the helm.
As he assumed increasing responsibility over the past year, Colburn said partners repeatedly expressed confidence in Lawrence’s leadership.
“I had many partners come up and say: ‘We think Brad’s doing a good job. We think this is going to be a good fit,’” Colburn said.
Colburn described Lawrence as a steady, collaborative leader well-suited to guide the firm through ongoing changes in the legal profession.
“He analyzes things, he looks at it, he doesn’t make rash decisions,” Colburn said. “He doesn’t go in there and say: ‘We’re going to change everything.’”
Post-pandemic structural shifts
Beyond the co-founders’ departures, Lawrence said Cantor Colburn is responding to competitive pressures that intensified during the COVID-19 pandemic. The broad acceptance of remote work allowed firms in larger markets such as California, New York and Boston to recruit attorneys more aggressively across state lines, often with compensation packages that regional firms struggled to match.
Cantor Colburn lost some attorneys during that period, Lawrence said.
However, as the pandemic subsided and more firms required at least partial returns to the office, Connecticut’s relatively lower cost of living and quality-of-life advantages helped narrow that competitive gap.
The firm’s attorney mix has shifted. In 2019, Cantor Colburn had about 100 attorneys, with fewer than 10% having less than five years of experience. Today, the firm has 76 attorneys, and roughly 23% are in their first five years of practice.
Cantor Colburn has also adjusted its physical footprint to reflect post-pandemic work patterns. The firm shuttered its Houston office last year and will allow its Detroit lease to expire, as those smaller satellite offices saw limited usage, Lawrence said. It will maintain offices in Washington, D.C., and Atlanta.
Hartford will remain the headquarters, though with reduced space.
The firm gave up one of the two floors it occupied in downtown Hartford’s Stilts Building when the lease expired Jan. 1, reflecting continued remote work among billing and other support staff. Cantor Colburn continues to lease the entire 22nd floor, a 22,400-square-foot space that has been recently remodeled.
There has been no consideration of a name change.
“Cantor Colburn is a nationally recognized name,” Lawrence said. “There would be no reason to change that at all.”
Pricing advantage
The firm’s geographic position remains part of its competitive strategy. Based between Boston and New York, Cantor Colburn can serve those markets while maintaining lower overhead than firms headquartered in major metro centers, Lawrence said.
That, combined with a larger pipeline of early-career attorneys, enables the firm to sustain lower billing rates without sacrificing quality, he said.
Cantor Colburn attorneys bill an average of about $450 per hour, compared with roughly $1,000 per hour at a Boston intellectual property firm. The firm’s sweet spot is generally half to two-thirds the rates charged by larger competitors, Lawrence said.
“We believe we can compete on quality at reasonable rates,” he said.
Although attorney headcount declined in the immediate post-pandemic period, Lawrence rejects the notion that the firm is rebuilding from a diminished state.
Instead, he describes a firm that remains among the top ranked nationally in patent issuance while increasing overall billings. The current strategy centers on expanding capacity — ensuring room to take on new clients without overburdening attorneys or sacrificing responsiveness.
“If you’re at full capacity, you can’t treat new clients the same way you treat existing ones,” he said.
That means hiring ahead of demand at times, even if it temporarily compresses profitability. Lawrence has been actively approving new hires, particularly in electrical engineering and semiconductor-related practices.
Sector growth and AI
One of the firm’s fastest-growing areas involves technologies that support artificial intelligence. The work often centers not on AI software itself but on the hardware infrastructure behind it, Lawrence said.
Advances in semiconductor materials, chip design, processing power and data center architecture are generating new patent filings.
Cantor Colburn recently hired two electrical engineers to support demand in that area. Lawrence said he has a job offer out to a patent agent and could hire two or three additional attorneys this year.
Biotechnology also remains a significant practice area. Although vaccine-related work has tapered from pandemic highs, Lawrence sees opportunity as research funding dynamics shift. Reduced government grant money may push biotech companies to seek more cost-efficient patent counsel — a dynamic he believes could favor firms outside high-cost urban centers.
Artificial intelligence is also reshaping the practice of law itself.
Lawrence acknowledges the emergence of AI-assisted tools that help attorneys prepare patent applications and other legal filings but approaches them cautiously. Some clients prohibit the use of AI platforms because of confidentiality concerns, particularly for unpublished patent applications.
He sees AI as potentially useful for handling repetitive writing and document-preparation tasks, freeing attorneys to focus on higher-level legal strategy. But he cautions that inexperienced lawyers who rely too heavily on AI may struggle to distinguish sound legal analysis from flawed output.
“That’s where I feel the shortcoming will be, is if you don’t have the experience to know that’s not right,” Lawrence said.
