Mid-career clerkship? Forum

[Anonymous User]

I’m a 4th year biglaw associate.

My goal is to exit biglaw within the next couple of years, would like to go to my home town and work at a small or mid firm there.

(Home town has a population of ~800k and a small legal market)

I previously did a COA clerkship but thinking of applying to federal district clerkships in my home town. Although it is not the center of a district, it does have a federal court and several district judges. Currently multiple openings on OSCAR that would start next fall.

I’m thinking that doing a district court clerkship there would enable me to build relationships to get a job in that market.

My main concern is that I recently lateraled, so would end up with like 1.5 years at current firm. Worried how it might look going from one firm to another to a clerkship in such rapid succession might look. Also, a little concerned that a district court clerkship at this stage would look bad? Perhaps would look like I’m taking a step back career wise?

Curious if anyone has done this or similar or has any thoughts.

FWIW I’m a litigator but as a big law junior I just don’t feel that I’ve gotten enough trial experience, and feel a district court clerkship could help with that.

Any feedback appreciated.

[Anonymous User]

Don't necessarily have advice, but this seems like a perfectly good reason to a clerkship as you lay it out. Don't know the market, but one caveat I would have is that if this is like a regional office of a big law firm that pays on lockstep they may not want to take on a 6th year associate and you might need to take a class year cut.

[Anonymous User]

Don't necessarily have advice, but this seems like a perfectly good reason to a clerkship as you lay it out. Don't know the market, but one caveat I would have is that if this is like a regional office of a big law firm that pays on lockstep they may not want to take on a 6th year associate and you might need to take a class year cut.

It wouldn’t be biglaw, there is one mid law ish firm, and several smaller firms (~20-40 attorneys) so I am fully expecting salary to be lower and negotiable, not on lockstep as a 6th year.

[Anonymous User]

I did something similar. Fed. COA -> 2.5 years at a firm -> Fed. District Court. I did it because I was burnt out and because I knew I didn't want to stay in the city I was in. The trial clerkship definitely helped me recharge, and it also helped me land a job in the city where I clerked, so the plan worked for me (although, many years later, I am once again very burnt out).

The concern about the smaller market having jobs for 6th years seems real, and not something I encountered. Maybe shoot some notes to people in the target city to ask?

[Anonymous User]

I think that relocating is excellent for leaving a particular job after a relatively short time. Changing jobs frequently in one city might look dodgy, but if you’re moving to another city then by definition you probably have to leave your job. You don’t have to tell people that you didn’t have to relocate exactly when you did; if nothing else, you can say that an opportunity arose and you couldn’t pass it up.

And I think that clerking is an excellent way to transition into a new market, and it won’t look like taking a step back. You can talk about it exactly as a way to transition to a new market - and that the move gave you the opportunity to take on a gig you didn’t get the chance to do earlier - and people will understand. I don’t think it would pose problems really even if you were staying where you work, but combined with a move I think it looks strategic, not weak.

(Also, random nitpick: I don’t think that being a 4th-5th year will really look like “mid career” to a judge. Being a midlevel associate isn’t really the same as being mid career; you’re still early in your career, just not as early as some clerks. Mid career would be if you had like 10-15 years’ experience. I bring this up only to suggest that it’s not as weird to clerk at this stage as you think. I know a bunch of AUSAs who followed your timeline.)

[Anonymous User]

I think that relocating is excellent for leaving a particular job after a relatively short time. Changing jobs frequently in one city might look dodgy, but if you’re moving to another city then by definition you probably have to leave your job. You don’t have to tell people that you didn’t have to relocate exactly when you did; if nothing else, you can say that an opportunity arose and you couldn’t pass it up.

And I think that clerking is an excellent way to transition into a new market, and it won’t look like taking a step back. You can talk about it exactly as a way to transition to a new market - and that the move gave you the opportunity to take on a gig you didn’t get the chance to do earlier - and people will understand. I don’t think it would pose problems really even if you were staying where you work, but combined with a move I think it looks strategic, not weak.

(Also, random nitpick: I don’t think that being a 4th-5th year will really look like “mid career” to a judge. Being a midlevel associate isn’t really the same as being mid career; you’re still early in your career, just not as early as some clerks. Mid career would be if you had like 10-15 years’ experience. I bring this up only to suggest that it’s not as weird to clerk at this stage as you think. I know a bunch of AUSAs who followed your timeline.)

OP — Thanks, I appreciate it. At least one of the clerkships I saw advertised on OSCAR was a 2 year term, so by the time I was done I’d have ~7 years of legal work of which 3 would be clerkship years. Not worried that the judge would think I was mid career, more concerned about what prospective employers would think of it.

I take your point though. Thanks.

[Anonymous User]

I think that relocating is excellent for leaving a particular job after a relatively short time. Changing jobs frequently in one city might look dodgy, but if you’re moving to another city then by definition you probably have to leave your job. You don’t have to tell people that you didn’t have to relocate exactly when you did; if nothing else, you can say that an opportunity arose and you couldn’t pass it up.

And I think that clerking is an excellent way to transition into a new market, and it won’t look like taking a step back. You can talk about it exactly as a way to transition to a new market - and that the move gave you the opportunity to take on a gig you didn’t get the chance to do earlier - and people will understand. I don’t think it would pose problems really even if you were staying where you work, but combined with a move I think it looks strategic, not weak.

(Also, random nitpick: I don’t think that being a 4th-5th year will really look like “mid career” to a judge. Being a midlevel associate isn’t really the same as being mid career; you’re still early in your career, just not as early as some clerks. Mid career would be if you had like 10-15 years’ experience. I bring this up only to suggest that it’s not as weird to clerk at this stage as you think. I know a bunch of AUSAs who followed your timeline.)

OP — Thanks, I appreciate it. At least one of the clerkships I saw advertised on OSCAR was a 2 year term, so by the time I was done I’d have ~7 years of legal work of which 3 would be clerkship years. Not worried that the judge would think I was mid career, more concerned about what prospective employers would think of it.

I take your point though. Thanks.

Oh got it, that makes sense. I think it’s still not really mid career, but I get that it’s not the standard associate timeline and could complicate that (and like I said, I’m nitpicking).

[Anonymous User]

I would probably try to apply directly first but if it's a local firm are you sure you need fed clerkship? Wouldn't a state clerkship appellate or even trial clerkship be just as good? You're not trying to impress them, you're just trying to beef up your trial experience and local ties.

[Anonymous User]

I would probably try to apply directly first but if it's a local firm are you sure you need fed clerkship? Wouldn't a state clerkship appellate or even trial clerkship be just as good? You're not trying to impress them, you're just trying to beef up your trial experience and local ties.

The difference in salary between federal and state clerkship would be something on the order of $50,000/year. That alone would make it a non-starter for me.

Also, if ultimately want to go the AUSA route or come back to big law or go in house, etc., I just think a federal clerkship would facilitate that. Not that a state trial or even intermediate appellate clerkship would totally derail those things, but I really think it would be a negative.

I just don’t see that as a viable option.

[lavarman84]

Federal judges are usually connected in the market, and if you actually make use of networking opportunities, you can put yourself in a good spot. I think it's a good idea, personally.

[Anonymous User]

I would probably try to apply directly first but if it's a local firm are you sure you need fed clerkship? Wouldn't a state clerkship appellate or even trial clerkship be just as good? You're not trying to impress them, you're just trying to beef up your trial experience and local ties.

The difference in salary between federal and state clerkship would be something on the order of $50,000/year. That alone would make it a non-starter for me.

Also, if ultimately want to go the AUSA route or come back to big law or go in house, etc., I just think a federal clerkship would facilitate that. Not that a state trial or even intermediate appellate clerkship would totally derail those things, but I really think it would be a negative.

I just don’t see that as a viable option.

Ah, makes sense. Guess it really depends on the locale -- where I am those clerkships and actually pay a bit more than federal clerkship.