Might get no-offered at 2L SA --> Magistrate clerk? Forum

[TFALAWL]

Hi all,

I'm working at a v20 satellite in SoCal with a small class and may get no offered (largely this is my fault due to lack of work experience. (i.e. review was "you're smart, but your lack of w/e shows in work product and we are concerned).

I have a 3.51 at UVA + M.A. from somewhere else.

In the event that I do not get an offer, I intend to apply for clerkships to get a second-bit at the big law apple (I actually enjoy it, I just got off to a bad start -- my firm is more "work style" than "wine and dine" which I like, despite the stress).

I would love to get a Dt. Clerkship, but I'm on the lower side of being competitive. So here are a few questions about Magistrates.

1. Would I be competitive in CDCA or any other CA district, or any other state that is competitive.

2. Could I likely go straight from magistrate to big law if: (a) i land a competitive magistrate; or (b) I don't land a competitive magistrate

3. How likely would I be able to get a D. Clerkship after magistrate.

4. Anyone have better ideas other than clerking for trying to get back into big law.

[Anonymous User]

I'm in a similar but not identical position. Struck out at OCIs at MPDB and recently landed a Dt. clerkship, with the hope of getting another shot at biglaw.

For biglaw purposes, you'd be better off targeting SSCs than federal madges, although I would imagine the SC of CA is really competitive.

1. As for district court clerkships, N.D. Cal. and C.D. Cal. are very competitive, but there's no harm in applying. E.D. Cal. and S.D. Cal. aren't cakewalks either. You'd want to expand your sights beyond CA if you're serious about applying to district courts. Your grades are on the lower end but LR could make up for that if you have it (or secondary journal/publication, to a lesser extent).

2. As a rule (with some exceptions) biglaw doesn't care about magistrate clerkships, but some firms do value SSC clerkships (at least enough to give a clerkship bonus for it). The notable exceptions are S.D.N.Y. or maybe bankruptcy court in D. Del. Clerking for a magistrate in C.D. Cal. (in L.A., not Santa Ana or Riverside) wouldn't be the worst idea, but I doubt it would make you a lock for biglaw.

3. Not many, but some district judges prefer or require clerking experience. You'd have a noticeable advantage for those judges and a slight advantage for many others, like the larger contingent that prefers work experience in general or probably the district judges on the same court as the madge you'd clerk for.

In short, clerking is strike two at biglaw and lateraling is strike three (and it's a crap shoot that can take years). If you're serious about biglaw and get no offered, get serious about clerking.

[mvp99]

they simply might be looking for an excuse to no offer you.. doubt your work product is that much different from the other summers

[Anonymous User]

I'm a C.D. Cal. clerk. My first advice is that you focus on your SA and improving your work product rather than worrying about alternatives. You will probably get an offer if you show a serious effort to address your firm's concerns. There are good career alternatives if you get no offered, so don't panic; the people I know who were no-offered from firms ended up getting good jobs in house at companies and nonprofits.

Clerkship hiring, of course, depends a great deal on the specific judge's preferences, and so it is hard to give a definitive answer about what you will or will not get. There are people with academic credentials inferior to yours clerking both for magistrate and district judges in this district; indeed, you have better grades than I did. However, even perfect grades will not guarantee you a position. My advice would be to apply to any judge you'd be willing to work for and hope for the best - you have a shot.

People go from magistrate to district clerkships on occasion, but I would not do a magistrate clerkship simply as a pathway to get a district clerkship. C.D. Cal. magistrate judges have an interesting, unique set of work; see C.D. Cal. General Orders 06-01 and 05-07 for the types of matters which are typically assigned to magistrate judges in this district.

Finally, while biglaw is certainly a possibility, and many firms specifically recruit clerks, I know district clerks who have been unable to find a biglaw position after clerking. Further, clerking is a lot of work, and it would be no fun to do it simply as a means to an end rather than out of a specific desire to do the work itself. You should ask yourself whether biglaw is really the ultimate end goal for which you must strive. Personally, I declined my offer at a big firm and will be going elsewhere after this clerkship. Many of my friends in biglaw are unhappy right now. My advice, if you are no-offered, is to think more broadly than simply trying to get back into biglaw at any cost. If you think a clerkship would be an exciting opportunity, you should pursue one on its own merits. After the clerkship, you might end up at a large firm. Or, you might find another opportunity that seems exciting to you.

[rpupkin]

For biglaw purposes, you'd be better off targeting SSCs than federal madges, although I would imagine the SC of CA is really competitive.

I'm not sure that's right. First, your imagination is accurate: the California Supreme Court is really competitive. It's currently quite a bit easier to get a COA clerkship on the 9th Circuit than it is to get a clerkship on the California SSC. There's no way that OP will get a clerkship there with his/her credentials.

And for big law purposes, clerking at a SSC can be helpful within the state itself but not for much else. If OP clerks on the Kansas Supreme Court or something, that's probably not going to help land a big law job in California. In my opinion, a federal magistrate clerkship is more useful for big law.