Page 1 of 1

NALP should further differentiate between clerkship types

Posted: Sun May 26, 2013 6:53 pm
by Lord Randolph McDuff
Federal vs. state clerkships are a good start, but there are some state clerkships that are really good and some that are low level, provide minimal compensation, and are unlikely to lead to a good job. I bring this up because I've observed that state clerkships on the Colorado Supreme Court or the Colorado Court of Appeals are great outcomes from CU, probably the best outcomes here aside from the very few that get federal clerkships. I assume it's similar in most states. So why can't NALP just ask the schools to breakdown their clerkship placement?

Such info could be very helpful. For example, Seton Hall churns out tons of clerks (35% of the class) and claims that 94% of them had full-time long term employment after their clerkships. ( Actually, they claim that 94% of those who clerked for over a year found such employment, without providing what percent of their clerkships lasted one year or more. ) Based on my experience in Colorado, where 70% of our clerks are either federal or state appellate, I am impressed with Seton Hall's clerkship score. If NALP would ask Seton Hall what percent of its clerks were in the New Jersey Supreme Court and what percent where in in six month stints in traffic court the data would be so much better.

Some links..

http://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/c ... clerkships

http://law.shu.edu/ProspectiveStudents/ ... /index.cfm

http://www.colorado.edu/law/2013/05/17/ ... ols-report

Re: NALP should further differentiate between clerkship types

Posted: Sun May 26, 2013 7:05 pm
by Richie Tenenbaum
IMO, the best way to break it down is federal appellate, federal district, state supreme court, and other state clerkships. But there really is no perfect way to breakdown this information. (Example: For someone working in Texas, it's probably a better result to clerk for the TX Supreme Court then it would be to clerk for a random district court judge in a flyover state.)

Re: NALP should further differentiate between clerkship types

Posted: Sun May 26, 2013 7:14 pm
by rad lulz
Richie Tenenbaum wrote:IMO, the best way to break it down is federal appellate, federal district, state supreme court, and other state clerkships. But there really is no perfect way to breakdown this information. (Example: For someone working in Texas, it's probably a better result to clerk for the TX Supreme Court then it would be to clerk for a random district court judge in a flyover state.)
Also needs an "other federal" category

Re: NALP should further differentiate between clerkship types

Posted: Sun May 26, 2013 7:18 pm
by Lord Randolph McDuff
rad lulz wrote:
Richie Tenenbaum wrote:IMO, the best way to break it down is federal appellate, federal district, state supreme court, and other state clerkships. But there really is no perfect way to breakdown this information. (Example: For someone working in Texas, it's probably a better result to clerk for the TX Supreme Court then it would be to clerk for a random district court judge in a flyover state.)
Also needs an "other federal" category
If we are are adding categories we might as well add one more. Including "State Appellate" would really illuminate the data from schools like Seton Hall.
Richie Tenenbaum wrote:But there really is no perfect way to breakdown this information. (Example: For someone working in Texas, it's probably a better result to clerk for the TX Supreme Court then it would be to clerk for a random district court judge in a flyover state.)
I agree completely. It's hard to make apples to apples comparisons across different law schools in different regions of the country. But the more information the better, ya know.

Re: NALP should further differentiate between clerkship types

Posted: Mon May 27, 2013 1:34 am
by timbs4339
If they're collecting it, no reason to break it down. What Michigan did is just awesome.

http://www.law.umich.edu/careers/classs ... stats.aspx

Re: NALP should further differentiate between clerkship types

Posted: Mon May 27, 2013 1:39 am
by rad lulz
timbs4339 wrote:If they're collecting it, no reason to break it down. What Michigan did is just awesome.

http://www.law.umich.edu/careers/classs ... stats.aspx
Needs ft/lt/bpr

Re: NALP should further differentiate between clerkship types

Posted: Mon May 27, 2013 6:57 am
by Monochromatic Oeuvre
timbs4339 wrote:If they're collecting it, no reason to break it down. What Michigan did is just awesome.

http://www.law.umich.edu/careers/classs ... stats.aspx
Really want to meet the graduate who took their T10 law degree and went to be a sheep farmer.

Re: NALP should further differentiate between clerkship types

Posted: Mon May 27, 2013 11:39 am
by philepistemer
Sheep farming with a law degree from michigan isn't that crazy. Big ag is more lucrative than big law, and a law degree may help that guy lobby for subsidies.

Re: NALP should further differentiate between clerkship types

Posted: Tue May 28, 2013 3:13 pm
by PRgradBYU
philepistemer wrote:Sheep farming with a law degree from michigan isn't that crazy. Big ag is more lucrative than big law, and a law degree may help that guy lobby for subsidies.
LOL @ the term "BigAg."