Top Law Schools

I'll be doing a COA clerkship (not 2d/9th/DC but not flyover) after a year at a V5. Would doing a second clerkship (my third year out from law school) for an SDNY judge, rather than going back to a firm, be helpful for elite litigation boutiques? Or AUSA? It's hard to tell if I would be less competitive for the top litigation shops because I'd be coming in as a mid-level, or if it would just be good to have that SDNY experience.

I know there's no easy answer, just curious to hear thoughts and didn't find much in a forum search.

I've heard of several people who did COA then D.Ct. I think the advantages are the same as they would if you'd done D.Ct to COA. SDNY is a great place to clerk and Im sure you will make plenty of contacts there if you had the chance. I just dont know how much of a tangible bump youll see.

Thanks for the responses. I'm leaning decently strongly against a second clerkship, especially given my debt and the opportunity cost, but just wanted to make sure that I wouldn't be hurting myself.

.

Anyone have any thoughts as to how adding that second clerkship (meaning 3 years of working (I'll still be a first-yr associate before clerking) vs. just 2) would affect hirability at firms like Susman, MTO, Keker, Wachtell, etc.? I'm probably only on the cusp of any of those either way, but curious if it would make a difference in either direction.

A. Nony Mouse wrote:I suspect DCt is slightly more helpful than COA for USAO, but it probably depends on the office and how they weight prestige/practical experience.

So I've talked extensively with AUSAs in about six different districts (four big city districts, two flyovers) and every single one has said they value D. Ct. over COA unless someone is going for a dedicated appellate spot (and the dedicated appellate spots are few and far between). Really what they want is someone with trial experience so if you're getting that as an associate, easier to pass on.

If I wanted USAO and there was any chance I could do SDNY, I would take it in a heartbeat (even if I had to live on peanut butter for a year).

Anonymous User wrote:Anyone have any thoughts as to how adding that second clerkship (meaning 3 years of working (I'll still be a first-yr associate before clerking) vs. just 2) would affect hirability at firms like Susman, MTO, Keker, Wachtell, etc.? I'm probably only on the cusp of any of those either way, but curious if it would make a difference in either direction.

Anyone have a thought about this? USAO is appealing but I'm not sure it's what I want to do, whereas an increase or decrease in hireability at any of the above firms or others like them would definitely move the needle.

Thanks for all responses so far.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Anyone have any thoughts as to how adding that second clerkship (meaning 3 years of working (I'll still be a first-yr associate before clerking) vs. just 2) would affect hirability at firms like Susman, MTO, Keker, Wachtell, etc.? I'm probably only on the cusp of any of those either way, but curious if it would make a difference in either direction.

Anyone have a thought about this? USAO is appealing but I'm not sure it's what I want to do, whereas an increase or decrease in hireability at any of the above firms or others like them would definitely move the needle.

Thanks for all responses so far.

I work at one of those firms and I doubt it. Your clerkship is already good enough to tick the highly prestigious clerkship box. Having another clerkship, even SDNY, isn't going to move the needle much if at all in your favor.

I'm a first-year at a top litigation shop now and, like you, beginning COA clerkship after 1 year at firm.

For firms such as mine, I think you'll be more competitive coming off your COA clerkship, based on who my firm has made offers to during the clerkship hiring season (as opposed to doing follow-on dist. ct). Exclusively COA clerks, I believe.

My suggestion would be to go back to your V5 or one of the lit firms, and have SDNY in your back pocket as an option down the road to make a break from BigLaw, which, let's be honest, is not very pleasant--i.e., you could get a clerkship on SDNY or EDNY in 2016 or 17. That'd give you a light at the end of the tunnel and probably be a good route to have a shot at an AUSA gig, too.

Anonymous User wrote:I'm a first-year at a top litigation shop now and, like you, beginning COA clerkship after 1 year at firm.

For firms such as mine, I think you'll be more competitive coming off your COA clerkship, based on who my firm has made offers to during the clerkship hiring season (as opposed to doing follow-on dist. ct). Exclusively COA clerks, I believe.

My suggestion would be to go back to your V5 or one of the lit firms, and have SDNY in your back pocket as an option down the road to make a break from BigLaw, which, let's be honest, is not very pleasant--i.e., you could get a clerkship on SDNY or EDNY in 2016 or 17. That'd give you a light at the end of the tunnel and probably be a good route to have a shot at an AUSA gig, too.

Thanks very much for this, that's kind of what I'm thinking. My one hesitation with that route is that I think I remember reading somewhere here that going firm -> clerkship -> firm -> clerkship is kind of a red flag (in showing you don't want to be at a firm) and that firms might not want to hire you coming out of that second clerkship (particularly if AUSA didn't work out, for example). Anyone have any sense as to whether there is truth in this?

.

I would personally do the SDNY clerkship sooner rather than later. SDNY is also just an awesome district to be a clerk.

I agree with the other guy that SDNY wouldn't help much. If you got a prominent judge, maybe, but otherwise they'll mostly still rely on your LS/GPA. My read is that you've got three tranches of people in play for these jobs: SCOTUS clerks, obviously. Then folks with prominent District or COA judges. Notable leg up for DC Circuit, obviously, but I'd rather clerk for Edith Jones on the 5th than a random 2nd or 9th Circuit judge. After that, folks with non-DC, non-feeder COA's. I don't think 2 or 9 really inherently outperforms by a big margin here, with the exception that those circuits have more well-known judges. SDNY with a prominent judge would be second, otherwise third category. In the third category its all about your grades and LS. There is a big spread among these clerks.

Obviously doing SDNY gives you another shot at a boutique if you don't get it the first time, and is great for AUSA. Might be a particular boost for firms in NY, but what firm in NY can't you get with a 4th or 6th Circuit clerkship? WLRK or Susman? Given same LS/GPA, will adding SDNY help at those firms?