A. Nony Mouse wrote:The problem is that those are mostly from aggrieved parties/lawyers appearing before the judge, which doesn't tell you much about what they're like to clerk for.
The focus of this thread is apparently a judge's behavior / interactions with a clerk (e.g., is the judge a screamer or a stapler-thrower?), but clerking for a judge who's an idiot is also terrible. For example, a couple of clerks in my building have confided that their judge doesn't care much for the law, doesn't like to get dirty with the facts, and (as you predicted) doesn't want to exert the effort to even attempt a thoughtful and legally correct order. The judge often rubber-stamps orders. Those confidences weren't surprising because it's pretty well understood throughout the district bar that the judge is awful.
If you clerk for a judge like that, you learn little about the mechanics of litigation, lawyering strategy, or persuasive writing. Also, the time clerking is also miserable because dockets often get out of control and the clerks arn't comfortable (as a frustrated judge might) attempting to get the litigation back on track. Finally, because the judge gets reversed frequently, you get cases back in all sorts of crazy procedural postures.
Robing room doesn't capture "bad" behavior in chambers, but looking at the reviews of the judges in my district, it tracks pretty accurately the quality of a judge's work. If you want to work for someone who produces good work, it could be a valuable resource.