Top Law Schools

So, for example, 11th Circuit >> 3rd Circuit.


Does anyone have any experience or thoughts on this? If one's going to clerk two years straight, it seems like it might be better in terms of broadening one's skillset to do it on two different levels (unless it's something like the D.C. Circuit which is ostensibly an "upgrade")


EDIT: For those who might search for this later, this thread had some valuable information, which makes sense.
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... +#p6504956

what's the end goal?

value depends on what you want in the end. diverse experience? time in 3d circuit? then great value

if you're looking for greater money, prestige, i don't know what value that would be...

I wonder whether a different circuit would really provide that much of a diverse experience. of course every judge is different and each circuit has slightly different dockets, but what you're asked to produce can't vary too much, right?

I would think a district court might present a larger diversity of experiences...

The most common double-CoA pairing I've seen is [X] Cir./D.C. Cir.

Because D.C. Cir. is seen as the most competitive of all the federal circuit courts, I guess some would say that it adds additional prestige (hate that word) to the ole' resume. Substantively, I think it's also a compelling choice for people who are set on admin law, government litigation, practicing in D.C., and the like. It also could be helpful, depending on the judge, if you're gunning for a SCOTUS clerkship.

As for something like 11th->3rd or 6th->9th or something like that, I guess it's really person-specific. I personally wouldn't want to do two COA clerkships just for the hell of it. But if my first clerkship was in a market that I wasn't interested in settling in, and then I received an interview for a clerkship I wanted "more" in an area I wanted "more," I could see the logic behind making that choice.

Otherwise, if you're going to clerk two years, my impression is that doing CoA and D.Ct. makes more sense. The two experiences will probably be much more different, meaning you'll probably learn more. But I'm just a 3L, so take all of this with a grain of salt.

Anonymous User wrote:The most common double-CoA pairing I've seen is [X] Cir./D.C. Cir.

Because D.C. Cir. is seen as the most competitive of all the federal circuit courts, I guess some would say that it adds additional prestige (hate that word) to the ole' resume. Substantively, I think it's also a compelling choice for people who are set on admin law, government litigation, practicing in D.C., and the like. It also could be helpful, depending on the judge, if you're gunning for a SCOTUS clerkship.

On a somewhat related note, does anyone have any experience/know anyone who has done Fed Cir. then D.C. Cir.? I have some interest in administrative law and appellate litigation in general, but I have IP credentials that make me think my best shot at an appellate clerkship out of law school would be with the Fed Cir. Would a D.C. Circuit judge be at all interested in hiring a former Fed Cir. clerk?

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:The most common double-CoA pairing I've seen is [X] Cir./D.C. Cir.

Because D.C. Cir. is seen as the most competitive of all the federal circuit courts, I guess some would say that it adds additional prestige (hate that word) to the ole' resume. Substantively, I think it's also a compelling choice for people who are set on admin law, government litigation, practicing in D.C., and the like. It also could be helpful, depending on the judge, if you're gunning for a SCOTUS clerkship.

On a somewhat related note, does anyone have any experience/know anyone who has done Fed Cir. then D.C. Cir.? I have some interest in administrative law and appellate litigation in general, but I have IP credentials that make me think my best shot at an appellate clerkship out of law school would be with the Fed Cir. Would a D.C. Circuit judge be at all interested in hiring a former Fed Cir. clerk?

That depends entirely on your credentials...

Anonymous User wrote:The most common double-CoA pairing I've seen is [X] Cir./D.C. Cir.

Because D.C. Cir. is seen as the most competitive of all the federal circuit courts, I guess some would say that it adds additional prestige (hate that word) to the ole' resume. Substantively, I think it's also a compelling choice for people who are set on admin law, government litigation, practicing in D.C., and the like. It also could be helpful, depending on the judge, if you're gunning for a SCOTUS clerkship.

As for something like 11th->3rd or 6th->9th or something like that, I guess it's really person-specific. I personally wouldn't want to do two COA clerkships just for the hell of it. But if my first clerkship was in a market that I wasn't interested in settling in, and then I received an interview for a clerkship I wanted "more" in an area I wanted "more," I could see the logic behind making that choice.

Otherwise, if you're going to clerk two years, my impression is that doing CoA and D.Ct. makes more sense. The two experiences will probably be much more different, meaning you'll probably learn more. But I'm just a 3L, so take all of this with a grain of salt.

This is OP.

This is essentially what my thoughts were. I'm a 2L now, so My plan is to try to get published, continue making good grades, and try to parlay the COA Clerkship I have now into a D.C. Cir. as a 3L