Top Law Schools

Let's say I wanted to do Biglaw for 2 or 3 years and then do a clerkship. How common is this? And would my grades matter as much?

Thanks.

It's quite common these days. Grades will still matter a lot, but there will probably be more leeway. There are a number of district judges who will basically only hire people with work experience, which limits their pool, so they have to be more forgiving of grades.

Like Elston said, it's very common these days. In the SDNY, for example, a significant number of judges strongly prefer hiring alums (or hiring far enough out so people get experience). You will be more competitive for clerkships a few years out. A strong recommendation from a brand-name partner goes a long way to making up for that B in contracts.

Thanks for the quick and useful answers guys. Couldn't find the answer to this with the search function for some reason.

Seems to happen all the time now.

I had this awkward moment at a firm earlier this fall during an interview with an associate when we realized we had both applied to the same judge the week before.

I'm in this boat. I have an offer to go clerk for a fed. d. ct. judge in a rad city. I clerked before for a fed coa judge. Do I want to be interviewing out of a clerkship as a 5th year? I don't know. I worry I'll be typecasted as a biglaw burnout that couldn't hack it the first time. My biglaw is uninterested in hiring back people that leave to clerk.

I did this. Clerked straight out for a DCt, went to BigLaw, left BigLaw for COA, and eventually returned to different BigLaw firm as a fifth-year lateral. The new firm didn't have concerns about my being a BigLaw burnout and accepted my explanation of my previous departure from BigLaw as based on a genuine desire to clerk on a top circuit court.

I'm doing this. I will leave to clerk in February at a DCt for 1.5 years after 2.5 years in biglaw. My firm said it would hire me back. FWIW, I've had a lot of substantive litigation experience that most juniors don't usually get (i.e., depo/trial experience) so that may have played a factor in my firm being willing to hire me back (because I won't be totally useless as a 4th year).

Anonymous User wrote:I'm in this boat. I have an offer to go clerk for a fed. d. ct. judge in a rad city. I clerked before for a fed coa judge. Do I want to be interviewing out of a clerkship as a 5th year? I don't know. I worry I'll be typecasted as a biglaw burnout that couldn't hack it the first time. My biglaw is uninterested in hiring back people that leave to clerk.

this seems as though it could be somewhat unusual since it's a trial court after a COA. That reflects differently than the other way around, which is certainly accepted practice. not to be overly cautious, and I couldn't tell you, but you might want to talk to someone more knowledgeable about this.

Actually I've run into a lot of people who do district court after COA. and if either is going to give you skills relevant to litigation, it's the district court. I get the concern about whether someone's going to look like a biglaw refugee or not have the skills to match their class year if they do a second clerkship, but I don't think which kind you do first would make a difference.

(I do think it probably matters that you do 2 different kinds - there isn't a lot of reason to leave a job to do a second clerkship at a level where you've already clerked. Unless it's a feeder COA and you're setting up your SCOTUS run, maybe.)

jbagelboy wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:I'm in this boat. I have an offer to go clerk for a fed. d. ct. judge in a rad city. I clerked before for a fed coa judge. Do I want to be interviewing out of a clerkship as a 5th year? I don't know. I worry I'll be typecasted as a biglaw burnout that couldn't hack it the first time. My biglaw is uninterested in hiring back people that leave to clerk.

this seems as though it could be somewhat unusual since it's a trial court after a COA. That reflects differently than the other way around, which is certainly accepted practice. not to be overly cautious, and I couldn't tell you, but you might want to talk to someone more knowledgeable about this.

I hope to stay in the area of the second clerkship when I'm done, and use the clerkship to move markets. I hope I can spin it as "I saw this as a great way to get roots in this city." I anticipate that I'll lose a class year.

A. Nony Mouse wrote: (I do think it probably matters that you do 2 different kinds - there isn't a lot of reason to leave a job to do a second clerkship at a level where you've already clerked. Unless it's a feeder COA and you're setting up your SCOTUS run, maybe.)

Sometimes a second clerkship at the same "level" can also help you break into a particular area of law. The best example is CoA -> Fed Circuit if you want patents. You can also imagine why district court -> SDNY can help get into securities lit, or even bankruptcy. There are some other examples, but you get the idea.

But, generally, yes there is no reason to do two clerkships at the same "level" otherwise.

OneMoreLawHopeful wrote:

A. Nony Mouse wrote: (I do think it probably matters that you do 2 different kinds - there isn't a lot of reason to leave a job to do a second clerkship at a level where you've already clerked. Unless it's a feeder COA and you're setting up your SCOTUS run, maybe.)

Sometimes a second clerkship at the same "level" can also help you break into a particular area of law. The best example is CoA -> Fed Circuit if you want patents. You can also imagine why district court -> SDNY can help get into securities lit, or even bankruptcy. There are some other examples, but you get the idea.

But, generally, yes there is no reason to do two clerkships at the same "level" otherwise.

Except clerking is a sweet gig.