Top Law Schools

Anonymous User wrote:I guess mine counts as a "miracle" too...

Landed a US District Court clerkship yesterday. My stats:

Top 50 law school
Top third, but I was unranked when I applied
L. Rev., but not e-board
Won a national moot court competition
Military officer before/during law school

Military service gives a pretty big bump with a lot of judges. (Assuming they end up seeing your resume.) That makes sense too - despite grades or school, every vet I have known to clerk has been phenemonal. Interesting stories. more disciplined. Not trying to undercut the miraculousness of your clerkship, just trying to let vets know they should apply more.

Anonymous User wrote:I guess mine counts as a "miracle" too...

Landed a US District Court clerkship yesterday. My stats:

Top 50 law school
Top third, but I was unranked when I applied
L. Rev., but not e-board
Won a national moot court competition
Military officer before/during law school

Congrats! Can I ask what district?

Any other clerkship miracles happen lately (hopefully in the lower T1/upper T2)?

T14, law review board, increasingly good grades since fall of 1L but nothing to write home about. No idea where I'm ranked (don't want to know), and I have no doubt it's not a very impressive number. 100+ applications, 1 interview, 1 offer from ultra-competitive district (DDC/SDNY/NDCA/CDCA) on opposite coast I have no ties to. I have every reason to believe I had strong letters, but no connections and no calls on my behalf to get my application read.

Don't know how it happened, and maybe one day I'll ask. But makes me glad I didn't count myself out when the common wisdom of the law school echo-chamber told me I should. Was in doubt I would land anything at all.

Anonymous User wrote:Any other clerkship miracles happen lately (hopefully in the lower T1/upper T2)?

The judge just hired my replacement and he was top 15% from a bottom T2 school. However, he had solid recs from professors and attorneys who knew the judge.

I recently got a miracle clerkship.

Top 30-40ish (rankings have fluctuated a lot in the past handful of years).
Top 50%
A few fluffy resume lines (EIC of 2ndary, moot court, publications, a few awards, etc.)

BUT the reason I got the clerkship was my recommendations. I have very, very good recommendations and the judge's chambers really liked them.

Here's a problem with miracle clerkships: They don't help you get jobs at firms with strict grade cutoffs if you're well below the cutoff. At my firm, for example, the grade cutoff is the same whether you clerked for the Supreme Court or not.

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:Here's a problem with miracle clerkships: They don't help you get jobs at firms with strict grade cutoffs if you're well below the cutoff. At my firm, for example, the grade cutoff is the same whether you clerked for the Supreme Court or not.

I think this is absolutely correct, but at least it's another year to learn stuff and make connections and gun for those jobs that don't have firm grade cut-offs.

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:Here's a problem with miracle clerkships: They don't help you get jobs at firms with strict grade cutoffs if you're well below the cutoff. At my firm, for example, the grade cutoff is the same whether you clerked for the Supreme Court or not.

As the recipient of a miracle US COA clerkship, I can attest to the truth of this post. Oh well, I'm the only person at my firm (the same one I summered at) with a US COA clerkship, and it was a fun year.

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:Here's a problem with miracle clerkships: They don't help you get jobs at firms with strict grade cutoffs if you're well below the cutoff. At my firm, for example, the grade cutoff is the same whether you clerked for the Supreme Court or not.

100% true. But some other less selective firms that would throw your resume in the trash will become interested. And from what I've gathered, lots of mid law and boutique firms become interested.

Sources: family friend is hiring partner at big firm. He was brutally honest with me when talking with him pre- and post-miracle clerkship offer. I was also about to interview with a boutique litigation firm and the woman who founded the firm flat out told me I've got a job waiting for me after the clerkship.

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:Here's a problem with miracle clerkships: They don't help you get jobs at firms with strict grade cutoffs if you're well below the cutoff. At my firm, for example, the grade cutoff is the same whether you clerked for the Supreme Court or not.

Is this the case if you're coming in effectively as a lateral (~3 years experience somewhere not as prestigious, then clerkship, then applying for a more prestigious firm)?

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:Here's a problem with miracle clerkships: They don't help you get jobs at firms with strict grade cutoffs if you're well below the cutoff. At my firm, for example, the grade cutoff is the same whether you clerked for the Supreme Court or not.

I obviously can't speak to other people's experience, but I have also personally experienced that some of these strict grade cut-offs are not as strict as touted here. I was shocked to get offers from a handful of firms that this forum claims are "strict grade cut-off."

This isn't to say people shouldn't try to be realistic, and I'm not saying such firms don't exist. I'm sure they do; in fact, I'm pretty positive I also experienced those grade cut-off based rejections from other firms. But it is to say that for some reason, law students and lawyers are obsessed with discouraging one another for the sake of it, and it's often bad advice. There usually isn't a whole lot of reason in counting yourself out (or tell other people to count themselves out) before trying. And in this particular instance, I'm not sure what value this particular "advice" has. Someone landed a miracle clerkship, but you don't think it will help get them to your firm, and possibly other certain firms. Maybe you're right, maybe you're wrong. Either way, so what? It's not reason to rethink the clerkship, which would put them in an arguably worse position, with less experience and less resume fodder.

Anonymous User wrote:

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:Here's a problem with miracle clerkships: They don't help you get jobs at firms with strict grade cutoffs if you're well below the cutoff. At my firm, for example, the grade cutoff is the same whether you clerked for the Supreme Court or not.

Is this the case if you're coming in effectively as a lateral (~3 years experience somewhere not as prestigious, then clerkship, then applying for a more prestigious firm)?

I think a lot of firms generally loosen their grade cutoffs for people with around 3+ years of experience, but not at my firm (or at least at my office).

Anonymous User wrote:

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:Here's a problem with miracle clerkships: They don't help you get jobs at firms with strict grade cutoffs if you're well below the cutoff. At my firm, for example, the grade cutoff is the same whether you clerked for the Supreme Court or not.

I obviously can't speak to other people's experience, but I have also personally experienced that some of these strict grade cut-offs are not as strict as touted here. I was shocked to get offers from a handful of firms that this forum claims are "strict grade cut-off."

This isn't to say people shouldn't try to be realistic, and I'm not saying such firms don't exist. I'm sure they do; in fact, I'm pretty positive I also experienced those grade cut-off based rejections from other firms. But it is to say that for some reason, law students and lawyers are obsessed with discouraging one another for the sake of it, and it's often bad advice. There usually isn't a whole lot of reason in counting yourself out (or tell other people to count themselves out) before trying. And in this particular instance, I'm not sure what value this particular "advice" has. Someone landed a miracle clerkship, but you don't think it will help get them to your firm, and possibly other certain firms. Maybe you're right, maybe you're wrong. Either way, so what? It's not reason to rethink the clerkship, which would put them in an arguably worse position, with less experience and less resume fodder.

I just wanted to posit a consideration that some people may not have been thinking of in the context of this thread ("It's a miracle! I'm saved!"). I think clerkships are totally worth it if your options are otherwise shitty, but maybe not if you're already in biglaw.

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:Here's a problem with miracle clerkships: They don't help you get jobs at firms with strict grade cutoffs if you're well below the cutoff. At my firm, for example, the grade cutoff is the same whether you clerked for the Supreme Court or not.

I obviously can't speak to other people's experience, but I have also personally experienced that some of these strict grade cut-offs are not as strict as touted here. I was shocked to get offers from a handful of firms that this forum claims are "strict grade cut-off."

This isn't to say people shouldn't try to be realistic, and I'm not saying such firms don't exist. I'm sure they do; in fact, I'm pretty positive I also experienced those grade cut-off based rejections from other firms. But it is to say that for some reason, law students and lawyers are obsessed with discouraging one another for the sake of it, and it's often bad advice. There usually isn't a whole lot of reason in counting yourself out (or tell other people to count themselves out) before trying. And in this particular instance, I'm not sure what value this particular "advice" has. Someone landed a miracle clerkship, but you don't think it will help get them to your firm, and possibly other certain firms. Maybe you're right, maybe you're wrong. Either way, so what? It's not reason to rethink the clerkship, which would put them in an arguably worse position, with less experience and less resume fodder.

I just wanted to posit a consideration that some people may not have been thinking of in the context of this thread ("It's a miracle! I'm saved!"). I think clerkships are totally worth it if your options are otherwise shitty, but maybe not if you're already in biglaw.

I think it is genuinely useful information. Some people gun for clerkships because they want to end up in biglaw and knowing beforehand that biglaw may still be out of the picture is useful information to have.

Went to a school ranked between 70-90; top 1/3, law review, moot court, judicial externships, etc. Accepted an offer at a district court on the West Coast after externing there. Apparently there were about 800 applicants.

TTT, Top of class, D Ct. in major market.

I think both of mine qualify as miracles. Lower end tier 2 school, top 5%, EIC of law review. Got a two-year district clerkship in flyover country and then got a CoA in a competitive circuit.

In terms of firm offers, I have a biglaw offer in one area of the country from when I summered, but I may want to work biglaw in the area where my circuit clerkship is. When it comes time to apply, will firms turn their noses up at my school and the fact that I've been clerking for a little more than three years? Or will they just see the CoA and hopefully ignore the rest?

I don't believe I fit the "top law schools" mold and can speak a little to the "miracle" clerkship point. I graduated in the top 5% from an unranked ABA-accredited school with a published law review note and executive board position, clinical experience, one year as a clerk at a law firm, and a summer federal judicial externship on my resume. As a 3L I applied for all open district clerkships in the state in which I attended school (flyover districts). I received one interview but did not get an offer. I passed the July bar exam after graduation and spent a couple of years working at a small firm. The pay wasn't there, but the federal litigation experience was. Last year I began applying for clerkships in both major markets and flyovers. Early this year I accepted an offer of a two-year district court clerkship in a major market far from where I attended school, and the judge had no prior connection to my school. So, my point here is that if you do well in a lower-ranked school it is possible to get clerkship interviews as a 3L. But if it doesn't pan out and you still really want to do a federal clerkship, get a few good years of applicable experience under your belt and keep applying.

Median (if even) at HYS, applied to three federal district clerkships. Yes, three, because I'm stupid and only applied to one district. Got an interview. You get lucky sometimes.

I think mine's borderline miracle...
top 5.5% at TTT and then top 20% at UT/Vandy/UCLA.
One interview, like literally a week after I submitted the app. One offer. I think it helped alot that it is my hometown district, but maybe not. Who knows? I also have an interview with a V15 firm for after the clerkship. I don't know that I will get it by any means, but it goes to show that some firms might loosen up cutoffs a bit.

I also want to add that even if the clerkship won't carry one to biglaw that didnt have the numbers in the first place, its still an amazing feat to snag one. I mean biglaw might be out but I have to believe that by accepting the clerkship, you have immeasurably helped your prospects for most places.

Anyone get a miracle clerkship at MA Probate and Family Courts or Court of Common Pleas in PA?

T100, Top 10%, LR (no e-board), SA in home state (offer), no publication, snagged a Fed. D.Ct. Clerkship

Anyone get a miracle clerkship at Delaware Family Court? What stats are they looking for?