Clerking @ armed forces and veterans claims Forum

[Anonymous User]

Are these worthwhile? From what I gather, they are not a3, since the are 15yr appointments?
I wouldn't expect them to be better than the circuit courts, but are they more marketable afterward than say the district courts? Do they transfer well into biglaw/biggov afterward? Or am I pissing in wind.

I ask because I have a military background and have a pretty wide span of connections that, while I understand these are civilians judges,a since the law they use is the UCMJ, I can mad a stronger case than many.


Thanks,

[03121202698008]

They won't transfer as well a district. Why would they? In a district court you're getting experience doing what the firm does... No firms do veterans claims as anything other than pro bono work.

[BrianFellow]

Article I appellate courts would generally have less prestige than federal district court, but in this economy you should certainly go for it.

[ak362]

If my understanding is correct, many of the CAAF judges are former JAGs or otherwise served as an officer in one of the branches. Same for the CAVC judges.

I agree with the previous posters that a CAAF/CAVC clerkship, while interesting, probably won't be too useful for Biglaw. Maybe BigGov, if you want to try going to the VA after working for the CAVC. The subject matter of the two courts is so idiosyncratic to particular subsets of military culture (military justice for the CAAF and post-service obtainment of benefits w/r/t the CAVC) that it doesn't quite translate well in terms of civil litigation and private practice. Not saying that there are no transferable skills whatsoever, just that the two courts are very unique. While the CAVC has been around for a while, it's still coming to grips with reviewing what was otherwise a "splendid isolation" w/r/t the VA.

Also, I think there are some Article I clerkships that might translate well to a niche BigLaw practice, e.g., the Court of Federal Claims for government Ks practices. BK court (although I suppose they're more Article III adjuncts, but nonetheless not life-tenured, etc.) also for BK practices, etc.

[BrianFellow]

I agree they wouldn't be useful re: substantive law, but I don't think they would hurt your chances at Biglaw and the firm would probably throw you the clerkship bonus. Learning how the case law sausage is made is valuable in any setting, and any judge appointed by the President is prestigious.

[03121202698008]

I agree they wouldn't be useful re: substantive law, but I don't think they would hurt your chances at Biglaw and the firm would probably throw you the clerkship bonus. Learning how the case law sausage is made is valuable in any setting, and any judge appointed by the President is prestigious.

To the contrary, I highly doubt you get the bonus. Many firms don't even give it for magistrate judges and THAT IS what you'll be doing for the first several years. The bonus is all about being able to advertise your pedigree to clients.

[BrianFellow]

Anyway, back to OP's question, CAAF could be very interesting if your interest in "BigGov" relates to criminal law. CAAF and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals are the only criminal appellate courts I know of in the USA.

You would have to educate employers that it's a criminal appellate court though, as most lawyers have no idea what the freak it is.