2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring

Seek and share information about clerkship applications, clerkship hiring timelines, and post-clerkship employment opportunities.
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are sharing sensitive information about clerkship applications and clerkship hiring. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned."
Anonymous User
Posts: 325937
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Mar 05, 2018 3:47 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Has anybody done a screener or callback with Winston & Strawn this season?


Bump. I applied but haven't heard back. Has anybody gotten an interview there?



I have an interview with them coming up shortly.


Yeah I'd also like to know. Are you comfortable sharing the city?

Anonymous User
Posts: 325937
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Mar 07, 2018 12:07 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Has anybody done a screener or callback with Winston & Strawn this season?


Bump. I applied but haven't heard back. Has anybody gotten an interview there?



I have an interview with them coming up shortly.


Yeah I'd also like to know. Are you comfortable sharing the city?



After I get an offer, I'll reveal. Sorry that this isn't helpful.

Anonymous User
Posts: 325937
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Mar 07, 2018 1:01 pm

Anyone get word about the Manatt SF clerkship reception yet? I know LA is happening next week.

Anonymous User
Posts: 325937
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Mar 07, 2018 2:13 pm

Any word on Keker hiring? I hear that they are interviewing now. Any offers or rejections?

Anonymous User
Posts: 325937
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Mar 07, 2018 4:18 pm

For clerkship hiring at a big law office that isn't the firm's headquarters, do the hiring people typically need to consult with the flagship office before making any offers?

Anonymous User
Posts: 325937
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Mar 07, 2018 5:08 pm

Any sense of employment opportunities from a district clerkship in the 9th circuit, non-CA?

Anonymous User
Posts: 325937
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Mar 08, 2018 5:32 pm

Has anyone heard from Kramer Levin post-interview (non-bankruptcy)?

Anonymous User
Posts: 325937
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Mar 08, 2018 6:41 pm

For those interested in non-firm jobs for clerks--got an offer at Federal Public Defender's office. Got lots of interviews based off of clerkship experience, seems like you either need that or several years of criminal experience.

Paul Revere

New
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 12:13 am

Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring

Postby Paul Revere » Thu Mar 08, 2018 7:36 pm

Anonymous User wrote:For those interested in non-firm jobs for clerks--got an offer at Federal Public Defender's office. Got lots of interviews based off of clerkship experience, seems like you either need that or several years of criminal experience.


Nice! Congrats

Anonymous User
Posts: 325937
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Mar 09, 2018 10:28 am

Anonymous User wrote:Has anyone heard from Kramer Levin post-interview (non-bankruptcy)?


got an offer there about a month ago

Anonymous User
Posts: 325937
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Mar 09, 2018 11:07 am

Anyone know anything about Patterson Belknap? I am not super big on going to NYC to practice law (seems like the worst place for that) BUT this firm seems different, idk. Any insight would be helpful.

Anonymous User
Posts: 325937
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Mar 09, 2018 12:02 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Anyone know anything about Patterson Belknap? I am not super big on going to NYC to practice law (seems like the worst place for that) BUT this firm seems different, idk. Any insight would be helpful.


It does seem like a genuinely great place to work. Market pay for reasonable hours and happier associates. Downsides are that the types of litigation are more limited than larger biglaw firms; there’s still a lot of RMBS work, which is highly leveraged, and certain kinds of IP. (I considered them for the culture, but came away from the interviews somewhat disappointed with their breadth).

Anonymous User
Posts: 325937
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Mar 09, 2018 12:29 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Anyone know anything about Patterson Belknap? I am not super big on going to NYC to practice law (seems like the worst place for that) BUT this firm seems different, idk. Any insight would be helpful.


It does seem like a genuinely great place to work. Market pay for reasonable hours and happier associates. Downsides are that the types of litigation are more limited than larger biglaw firms; there’s still a lot of RMBS work, which is highly leveraged, and certain kinds of IP. (I considered them for the culture, but came away from the interviews somewhat disappointed with their breadth).


Thanks! In terms of tiers / prestige, my impression is that they are around the level of a Zuckerman or MoloLamken, but below a Bartlit Beck/Susman/Keker. Does that seem right?

Anonymous User
Posts: 325937
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Mar 09, 2018 1:02 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Anyone know anything about Patterson Belknap? I am not super big on going to NYC to practice law (seems like the worst place for that) BUT this firm seems different, idk. Any insight would be helpful.


It does seem like a genuinely great place to work. Market pay for reasonable hours and happier associates. Downsides are that the types of litigation are more limited than larger biglaw firms; there’s still a lot of RMBS work, which is highly leveraged, and certain kinds of IP. (I considered them for the culture, but came away from the interviews somewhat disappointed with their breadth).

I also interviewed with them because of what I heard about the culture, but I wasn't really feeling it. I think it's a good alternative to the other NYC biglaw firms for those who want somewhat more reasonable hours, more substantive experience, and don't mind the limited practice areas. But it's not so exceptional as to warrant moving to NYC just to work there.

Even if the hours are more reasonable than other NYC firms, there's still a 2100-hour requirement to get your bonus. I know 250 of that is non-billable, but pro bono is included in that category. And I got the sense that some people easily exceeded 2100 because there was so much work, which doesn't make it much different than other places. People making sure not to bother you at unreasonable hours is great, but it doesn't really reduce the amount of work.

The practice area breadth is indeed limited, and the firm's growth has been flat pretty much forever. They also only make 1 new partner per year on average. And I think the early substantive experience is a bit overblown. None of the juniors I spoke to had done anything much more substantive than juniors at other firms.

Anonymous User wrote:Thanks! In terms of tiers / prestige, my impression is that they are around the level of a Zuckerman or MoloLamken, but below a Bartlit Beck/Susman/Keker. Does that seem right?

They're not really a boutique, so I'm not sure how you'd compare those, but in terms of just prestige, I guess that sounds about right. It has a very good reputation in NYC, but the name isn't as recognizable if you ever want to leave.

Anonymous User
Posts: 325937
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Mar 09, 2018 1:25 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Anyone know anything about Patterson Belknap? I am not super big on going to NYC to practice law (seems like the worst place for that) BUT this firm seems different, idk. Any insight would be helpful.


It does seem like a genuinely great place to work. Market pay for reasonable hours and happier associates. Downsides are that the types of litigation are more limited than larger biglaw firms; there’s still a lot of RMBS work, which is highly leveraged, and certain kinds of IP. (I considered them for the culture, but came away from the interviews somewhat disappointed with their breadth).

I also interviewed with them because of what I heard about the culture, but I wasn't really feeling it. I think it's a good alternative to the other NYC biglaw firms for those who want somewhat more reasonable hours, more substantive experience, and don't mind the limited practice areas. But it's not so exceptional as to warrant moving to NYC just to work there.

Even if the hours are more reasonable than other NYC firms, there's still a 2100-hour requirement to get your bonus. I know 250 of that is non-billable, but pro bono is included in that category. And I got the sense that some people easily exceeded 2100 because there was so much work, which doesn't make it much different than other places. People making sure not to bother you at unreasonable hours is great, but it doesn't really reduce the amount of work.

The practice area breadth is indeed limited, and the firm's growth has been flat pretty much forever. They also only make 1 new partner per year on average. And I think the early substantive experience is a bit overblown. None of the juniors I spoke to had done anything much more substantive than juniors at other firms.

Anonymous User wrote:Thanks! In terms of tiers / prestige, my impression is that they are around the level of a Zuckerman or MoloLamken, but below a Bartlit Beck/Susman/Keker. Does that seem right?

They're not really a boutique, so I'm not sure how you'd compare those, but in terms of just prestige, I guess that sounds about right. It has a very good reputation in NYC, but the name isn't as recognizable if you ever want to leave.


This is really helpful. Thanks!

Anonymous User
Posts: 325937
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Mar 09, 2018 3:04 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Anyone know anything about Patterson Belknap? I am not super big on going to NYC to practice law (seems like the worst place for that) BUT this firm seems different, idk. Any insight would be helpful.


It does seem like a genuinely great place to work. Market pay for reasonable hours and happier associates. Downsides are that the types of litigation are more limited than larger biglaw firms; there’s still a lot of RMBS work, which is highly leveraged, and certain kinds of IP. (I considered them for the culture, but came away from the interviews somewhat disappointed with their breadth).

I also interviewed with them because of what I heard about the culture, but I wasn't really feeling it. I think it's a good alternative to the other NYC biglaw firms for those who want somewhat more reasonable hours, more substantive experience, and don't mind the limited practice areas. But it's not so exceptional as to warrant moving to NYC just to work there.

Even if the hours are more reasonable than other NYC firms, there's still a 2100-hour requirement to get your bonus. I know 250 of that is non-billable, but pro bono is included in that category. And I got the sense that some people easily exceeded 2100 because there was so much work, which doesn't make it much different than other places. People making sure not to bother you at unreasonable hours is great, but it doesn't really reduce the amount of work.

The practice area breadth is indeed limited, and the firm's growth has been flat pretty much forever. They also only make 1 new partner per year on average. And I think the early substantive experience is a bit overblown. None of the juniors I spoke to had done anything much more substantive than juniors at other firms.

Anonymous User wrote:Thanks! In terms of tiers / prestige, my impression is that they are around the level of a Zuckerman or MoloLamken, but below a Bartlit Beck/Susman/Keker. Does that seem right?

They're not really a boutique, so I'm not sure how you'd compare those, but in terms of just prestige, I guess that sounds about right. It has a very good reputation in NYC, but the name isn't as recognizable if you ever want to leave.


This is really helpful. Thanks!


FYI -- they just offered an interview today. So they are still hiring it seems.

Anonymous User
Posts: 325937
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Mar 09, 2018 10:53 pm

Anonymous User wrote:I should probably know this, but does anyone know how working with recruiters works coming out of a clerkship (in my case, a non-SDNY/D.DC district court)? And in particular, for clerks who worked in-between graduation and their clerkship?

An associate at my old firm passed along an email from a recruiter. I had been operating under the assumption that firms would not pay recruiters when hiring current clerks (because that's what a recruiter I had previously worked with said). This recruiter, though, told me that its different for clerks who worked before their clerkship (and that it depends on the firm/that particular contract). I'm assuming that the recruiter would not intentionally mislead me, given that it would be against their interest to do so.

Another clerk on my court, however, just advised me not to use recruiters because firms expect clerks to apply directly and don't want to pay the placement fee on top of the clerkship bonus (and would therefore select another candidate, all else being equal--which makes sense). I guess my hope, previously, was to leverage the recruiter's contacts and that it would be advantageous to have someone advocate on my behalf. I'm not sure if that is worth it though (maybe for opportunities that are not made public?). Any guidance would be appreciated. Thanks!


Do what you will with this tale of two friends.

My first friend clerked with me in a major west coast market. He did two one-year clerkships in the same fed district (but with different judges) back to back. He used a recruiter and was hired for the New York office of a big firm on the Cravath scale. He got credit for his two years and a $50k bonus.

Another friend is the head of recruiting (which baffles me since they graduated from a T-10 law school) at the home office of—a west coast based—big firm on the Cravath scale. They told me that their firms policy was to not hire clerks who came through recruiters because they are unwilling to pay a recruiter’s commission (well into five figures) as well as a bonus to the clerk. A few months later my friend also went out of their way to call me say, don’t use a recruiter to reapply anywhere you’ve already applied (or vice versa); the second a commission is attached to someone we had for free (sorta) they’re toxic to us and we’d rather hire someone else than pay or fight with a recruiter (I never asked what prompted this call but I image a situation like this happened in real time and they thought me and our earlier discussion).

Recently, I told the first friend what the recruiter friend told me and we tried to reconcile these facts. The conclusion we came to was that their signing bonus was reduced from $75k (remember they had two years of clerkship with no time in between) to $50k in order cover the cost of the recruiter.

I suppose the takeaway—if there is one—is that it’s possible get a big firm job out of clerkship using a recruiter, but if possible it should be avoided.

Anonymous User
Posts: 325937
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Mar 10, 2018 12:31 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Looking for a little advice.

I'm a fed appellate clerk with an offer from a great firm (v-15) known for its appellate practice. Recently I received an offer from a state's SG's office. The SG promised me I'd be arguing some of the state's most important appeals in front of the state's supreme court and the fed appellate court by the end of the year. Obviously the money is significantly less, but appellate work is my thing.

I'm pretty tempted by the SG's offer. Am I crazy to turn down biglaw? Would anybody else do this?

Yes, I would turn down an offer from Gibson Dunn to work for my state's SG office.


I went to a state SG straight from my clerkship, but I know it will be only be for a short period of time for financial reasons. I love it and have had way better experience (I think) than if I had gone to a law firm. If I could afford to make a career of it at this point, I'd be tempted.


Listen to these guys, dude. You don’t somehow become less marketable after arguing on behalf of a state.

Anonymous User
Posts: 325937
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Mar 12, 2018 1:56 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Looking for a little advice.

I'm a fed appellate clerk with an offer from a great firm (v-15) known for its appellate practice. Recently I received an offer from a state's SG's office. The SG promised me I'd be arguing some of the state's most important appeals in front of the state's supreme court and the fed appellate court by the end of the year. Obviously the money is significantly less, but appellate work is my thing.

I'm pretty tempted by the SG's offer. Am I crazy to turn down biglaw? Would anybody else do this?

Yes, I would turn down an offer from Gibson Dunn to work for my state's SG office.


I went to a state SG straight from my clerkship, but I know it will be only be for a short period of time for financial reasons. I love it and have had way better experience (I think) than if I had gone to a law firm. If I could afford to make a career of it at this point, I'd be tempted.


Listen to these guys, dude. You don’t somehow become less marketable after arguing on behalf of a state.


You don't think it might be quite difficult to land biglaw later at a firm like GDC after you turn down those firms post-law school or post-clerkship? I've heard the ideal path is 1-2 years clerking --> 2-3 years biglaw --> your ideal gov't work (perhaps that is state SG's office) for 5-10 years --> back to biglaw as a partner.

Anonymous User
Posts: 325937
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Mar 12, 2018 3:44 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Any word on Keker hiring? I hear that they are interviewing now. Any offers or rejections?


Bumping this, as I am also interested.

Anonymous User
Posts: 325937
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Mar 12, 2018 3:53 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Any word on Keker hiring? I hear that they are interviewing now. Any offers or rejections?


Bumping this, as I am also interested.


I heard through the grapevine of an offer

Anonymous User
Posts: 325937
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Mar 12, 2018 5:42 pm

Anything else on Winston & Strawn? Anybody?

Anonymous User
Posts: 325937
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Mar 12, 2018 6:09 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Any word on Keker hiring? I hear that they are interviewing now. Any offers or rejections?


Bumping this, as I am also interested.


I heard through the grapevine of an offer


Good to know -- congrats to whoever that person is.

lavarman84

Platinum
Posts: 7712
Joined: Thu May 28, 2015 5:01 pm

Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring

Postby lavarman84 » Mon Mar 12, 2018 8:48 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Looking for a little advice.

I'm a fed appellate clerk with an offer from a great firm (v-15) known for its appellate practice. Recently I received an offer from a state's SG's office. The SG promised me I'd be arguing some of the state's most important appeals in front of the state's supreme court and the fed appellate court by the end of the year. Obviously the money is significantly less, but appellate work is my thing.

I'm pretty tempted by the SG's offer. Am I crazy to turn down biglaw? Would anybody else do this?

Yes, I would turn down an offer from Gibson Dunn to work for my state's SG office.


I went to a state SG straight from my clerkship, but I know it will be only be for a short period of time for financial reasons. I love it and have had way better experience (I think) than if I had gone to a law firm. If I could afford to make a career of it at this point, I'd be tempted.


Listen to these guys, dude. You don’t somehow become less marketable after arguing on behalf of a state.


Where is the best place to look if you're interested in working as a state SG after a COA clerkship?

Anonymous User
Posts: 325937
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: 2017-2018 Post-Clerkship Hiring

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Mar 12, 2018 9:54 pm

lavarman84 wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Looking for a little advice.

I'm a fed appellate clerk with an offer from a great firm (v-15) known for its appellate practice. Recently I received an offer from a state's SG's office. The SG promised me I'd be arguing some of the state's most important appeals in front of the state's supreme court and the fed appellate court by the end of the year. Obviously the money is significantly less, but appellate work is my thing.

I'm pretty tempted by the SG's offer. Am I crazy to turn down biglaw? Would anybody else do this?

Yes, I would turn down an offer from Gibson Dunn to work for my state's SG office.


I went to a state SG straight from my clerkship, but I know it will be only be for a short period of time for financial reasons. I love it and have had way better experience (I think) than if I had gone to a law firm. If I could afford to make a career of it at this point, I'd be tempted.


Listen to these guys, dude. You don’t somehow become less marketable after arguing on behalf of a state.


Where is the best place to look if you're interested in working as a state SG after a COA clerkship?


Your home state, the state you went to school in, less-desirable states that need people and where you are willing to live and convince someone of that



Return to “Judicial Clerkships?

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.