Chicago’s legal advertising market defies the concentration patterns of other major markets. No single firm controls significant share. No dominant strategy emerges. Fragmentation rules.
The city’s legal advertisers split $7.3 million monthly across dozens of firms, a fraction of where $150 million in national legal advertising goes. The top five control just 48% combined. That means the bottom half of the market captures 52% of all spending.
This fragmented landscape offers outsized opportunity for firms ready to differentiate through streaming. The Chicago legal advertising guide maps the competitive terrain firm by firm.
Malman Law Leads by Default
Malman Law occupies the top spot with $998K monthly spend, representing 13.7% of Chicago’s market. This makes them the notional leader.
But here’s the catch: Malman runs zero CTV spend.
One hundred percent of their budget goes to traditional media. Broadcast consumes the lion’s share. Radio rounds out their mix. Streaming registers as zero.
Morgan and Morgan trails closely at $925K monthly (12.7%), applying their national broadcast strategy through traditional channels. Morgan, like Malman, hasn’t shifted budget into CTV at scale.
This creates an unusual dynamic: Chicago’s largest PI advertisers still view streaming as peripheral.
The Top Five Tell a Story
Here is how the top five stack up by monthly spend and market share.
Chicago’s Largest Legal Advertisers
- Malman Law: $998K (13.7%)
- Morgan and Morgan: $925K (12.7%)
- Power Rogers & Smith: $637K (8.7%)
- Langdon & Emison: $546K (7.5%)
- Salvi Schostok & Abramson: $444K (6.1%)
These five firms control $3.55 million, or 48% of Chicago’s legal ad market. The range spans 13.7% to 6.1%, just 7.6 percentage points separating leader from fifth place.
Power Rogers is a prestigious, plaintiff-focused firm with deep roots in Illinois. Langdon & Emison brings similar traditional strength. Salvi Schostok represents high-end personal injury work.
All three maintain traditional media strategies. None has positioned streaming as a core channel.
The implication cuts both ways. It means the market leader has not consolidated advantages through digital innovation. It also means a scrappy firm could vault to prominence by doing exactly that.
Prestige Without Digital
Chicago attracts high-caliber personal injury practices. Firms like Power Rogers and Salvi Schostok command premium positioning and strong reputations. They don’t chase market share aggressively.
This prestige mindset often translates into traditional spending. Established broadcast relationships. Radio loyalty. Print, where it survives.
Streaming, by this logic, remains a “new” channel. Unproven in their eyes. Lacking the gravitas of broadcast.
Yet this perception gap creates the opportunity. These prestigious firms have built brand equity through traditional channels. That equity travels to streaming, and streaming TV advertising for law firms often delivers lower acquisition costs than traditional media.
A firm that takes their established reputation and applies streaming discipline would gain disproportionate reach in Chicago.
CTV at 20% Leaves Room
Chicago allocates 20% of legal ad spend to CTV. Broadcast claims 59%. Cable takes 3%. Radio rounds out at 19%.
Twenty percent places Chicago in the middle tier among major markets. Los Angeles leads at 33%. Houston runs 18%. New York sits at 11%.
But the 20% number masks underdeployment by the largest firms. Morgan & Morgan, Malman, Power Rogers, and Langdon & Emison likely skew traditional in their individual mixes.
Smaller firms may drive the 20% figure upward. Or newer practices allocate more aggressively to streaming.
Either way, the top tier still views CTV as secondary.
Growth Accelerates
Chicago’s legal ad market grew 12.3% over the past year. That’s double New York’s growth rate and in line with national trends.
Growth typically flows into proven channels. When Malman Law grows, they likely expand broadcast. Morgan follows similar logic.
But growth could be redirected. A firm willing to shift two to three percentage points from broadcast to streaming could establish meaningful CTV presence while maintaining broadcast reach.
In a fragmented market with no clear leader, messaging and channel strategy matter more than scale.
The Chicago Advantage
Fragmentation looks like weakness. It is actually Chicago’s greatest strength.
No entrenched leader dominates through traditional media buying power. Premium broadcast inventory remains available. The market lacks a single player who controls messaging.
This means a firm with a superior streaming strategy could bypass the traditional hierarchy entirely. They could build share faster. They could target more efficiently. They could measure impact with precision broadcast cannot match.
Malman, Morgan, and Power Rogers built their franchises through traditional dominance. But they have not translated that dominance to streaming.
The first Chicago firm to bridge that gap wins disproportionate advantage in a fragmented market.
References
- AdImpact. "Legal Advertising Trends Report, Q1 2026." 2026.
- Nielsen. "Streaming Reaches Historic TV Milestone, Eclipses Combined Broadcast and Cable Viewing." 2025.
- eMarketer. "US TV and Connected TV Ad Spending Forecasts, H2 2025." 2025.
- Walker Advertising. "Top Legal Marketing Trends to Watch in 2026." 2026.
- IAB. "2025 Digital Video Ad Spend and Strategy Report." 2025.