Top Law Schools

would this language be correct

Prepared and revised legal instruments including demand letters, mechanic’s liens, motions including motion for entry of default judgment and motion for summary judgment, original petitions, and post judgment writs of garnishment.

thanks

anyone?

I wouldn't use the term "legal instrument". Never heard of a motion being called a legal instrument... Also, nesting "including" is weird.

Anonymous User wrote:would this language be correct

Prepared and revised legal instruments including demand letters, mechanic’s liens, motions including motion for entry of default judgment and motion for summary judgment, original petitions, and post judgment writs of garnishment.

thanks

Agree with above poster.

Prepared and revised demand letters, mechanic’s liens, original petitions, and post judgment writs of garnishment. Drafted motion for entry of default judgment and motion for summary judgment.

Or

Prepared and revised demand letters, mechanic’s liens, original petitions, post judgment writs of garnishment, motion for entry of default judgment, and motion for summary judgment.

Also focus on the importance of these documents... some of the docs listed are essentially form documents while others (summary judgment) are more substantive. Don't bury the lead.

I agree, I wouldn't say "instruments". But I think it's fine if you said "legal documents, including". But if you use "including" there, don't use the same term again wrt motions like you did.

Agree with the don't bury the lead advice.

I'd go with: Drafted and revised motions for summary judgment, motions for default judgment, demand letters, mechanic’s liens, original petitions, and post-judgment writs of garnishment.

Who cares if you drafted and revised motions for summary judgment. What is important is whether you won. You need to "show" not "tell" what you did. "Won motion for summary judgment in a $2M breach of contract case."

sparty99 wrote:Who cares if you drafted and revised motions for summary judgment. What is important is whether you won. You need to "show" not "tell" what you did. "Won motion for summary judgment in a $2M breach of contract case."

sounds like the job description might be for a paralegal.

Even if it's something like a summer job, it's still good experience to say you drafted the motion even if there wasn't a shot in hell of winning

I think that depends on the position. If the OP is a full-time associate, fine, but if they're talking about SA or other student work I think saying they "won" is a little weird, since they can't represent anyone yet. "Drafted winning motion for SJ" maybe.

sparty99 wrote:Who cares if you drafted and revised motions for summary judgment. What is important is whether you won. You need to "show" not "tell" what you did. "Won motion for summary judgment in a $2M breach of contract case."

... what? I won't disagree that accentuating the favorable outcomes of motions is preferable, but by no means do you omit experience because you "lost." Experience is experience.

1styearlateral wrote:

sparty99 wrote:Who cares if you drafted and revised motions for summary judgment. What is important is whether you won. You need to "show" not "tell" what you did. "Won motion for summary judgment in a $2M breach of contract case."

... what? I won't disagree that accentuating the favorable outcomes of motions is preferable, but by no means do you omit experience because you "lost." Experience is experience.

And no one is going to blame or credit this presumably pretty junior person for happening to work on a winning/losing case.

Not just juniors. Why would a mid level omit a trial they first chaired or a SCOTUS (or other appellate court really, this is just the most exteme example) argument just because they didnt win? Of course, past a certain point you need to focus on your wins (because who would hire someone who went to trial 100 times and lost every single trial?) but that's very far off for most people.

OP here

This is for a 1L law clerk position

thank you for the responses

Every litigation attorney worth a damn has drafted motions for summary judgment or some type of motion. Simply stating what you did does not distinguish you as a candidate. You prepared demand letters. So what? Did the other party stop what they were doing? What type of case was it? How much money was at stake? You drafted a motion for default judgment? Okay. And? Was the motion granted? Such a boring resume.

sparty99 wrote:Every litigation attorney worth a damn has drafted motions for summary judgment or some type of motion. Simply stating what you did does not distinguish you as a candidate. You prepared demand letters. So what? Did the other party stop what they were doing? What type of case was it? How much money was at stake? You drafted a motion for default judgment? Okay. And? Was the motion granted? Such a boring resume.

dude, he's a 1L law clerk. He's not setting the legal world on fire yet and he just needs to show what he's been exposed to. He may not even know the answers to some of those things.

Anonymous User wrote:OP here

This is for a 1L law clerk position

thank you for the responses

You need to make your resume "results" oriented. You are not distinguishing yourself. Even if its an internship, you need to bring the heat.

sparty99 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:OP here

This is for a 1L law clerk position

thank you for the responses

You need to make your resume "results" oriented. You are not distinguishing yourself. Even if its an internship, you need to bring the heat.

This is dumb. If I'm looking at 1L resumes, I'm not looking for wins and losses and end results. I'd be suspicious of anyone claiming they get results who is looking for a 1L position. I'm looking for basic knowledge of basic drafting and day-to-day stuff.

kalvano wrote:

sparty99 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:OP here

This is for a 1L law clerk position

thank you for the responses

You need to make your resume "results" oriented. You are not distinguishing yourself. Even if its an internship, you need to bring the heat.

This is dumb. If I'm looking at 1L resumes, I'm not looking for wins and losses and end results. I'd be suspicious of anyone claiming they get results who is looking for a 1L position. I'm looking for basic knowledge of basic drafting and day-to-day stuff.

No one cares what you are looking at. You don't know resumes.

sparty99 wrote:Who cares if you drafted and revised motions for summary judgment. What is important is whether you won. You need to "show" not "tell" what you did. "Won motion for summary judgment in a $2M breach of contract case."

This is horrible advice.

rpupkin wrote:

sparty99 wrote:Who cares if you drafted and revised motions for summary judgment. What is important is whether you won. You need to "show" not "tell" what you did. "Won motion for summary judgment in a $2M breach of contract case."

This is horrible advice.

You are right. Having a "results" oriented resume is horrible advice. Yeah, okay. I used to get paid to write resumes.

Anonymous User wrote:

kalvano wrote:

sparty99 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:OP here

This is for a 1L law clerk position

thank you for the responses

You need to make your resume "results" oriented. You are not distinguishing yourself. Even if its an internship, you need to bring the heat.

This is dumb. If I'm looking at 1L resumes, I'm not looking for wins and losses and end results. I'd be suspicious of anyone claiming they get results who is looking for a 1L position. I'm looking for basic knowledge of basic drafting and day-to-day stuff.

No one cares what you are looking at. You don't know resumes.

This is at best second-rate trolling.

OP if you do have experience with successful motions it's maybe worth adding a "prepared [part] of a successful ___ motion" to the general description provided you fully understand why the motion was successful in the eyes of the court , but don't exclude work you did just because the attorneys didn't win, and don't claim that you specifically won, because almost no one is really going to believe you single-handedly won anything in your 1L year.

Anonymous User wrote:would this language be correct

Prepared and revised legal instruments including demand letters, mechanic’s liens, motions including motion for entry of default judgment and motion for summary judgment, original petitions, and post judgment writs of garnishment.

thanks

You will just get passed over for opportunities because you didn't proceed with a results oriented resume which would allow you to distinguish yourself and stand out from all of the other law school resumes which simply state, "Performed legal research on xyz topics." "Successfuly prepared motion for entry of default judgment which was granted by the Court."

Anonymous User wrote:

rpupkin wrote:

sparty99 wrote:Who cares if you drafted and revised motions for summary judgment. What is important is whether you won. You need to "show" not "tell" what you did. "Won motion for summary judgment in a $2M breach of contract case."

This is horrible advice.

You are right. Having a "results" oriented resume is horrible advice. Yeah, okay. I used to get paid to write resumes.

Sounds right.

rpupkin wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

rpupkin wrote:

sparty99 wrote:Who cares if you drafted and revised motions for summary judgment. What is important is whether you won. You need to "show" not "tell" what you did. "Won motion for summary judgment in a $2M breach of contract case."

This is horrible advice.

You are right. Having a "results" oriented resume is horrible advice. Yeah, okay. I used to get paid to write resumes.

Sounds right.

Yeah, but ask me how I got Big law interviews despite being well below median and pre-law school interviews at McKinsey and Bank of America I-Banking despite not being a finance grad. I'm a resume writing expert - studied all the greats, Martin Yate, Joyce Lain Kennedy.