Top Law Schools

Hi all,

I am an alum applicant that is having a very difficult time getting interviews, and was hoping for some advice. First, some background:

I am a third year associate at an elite NY firm (think Davis Polk, etc.). I graduated with a 3.6+ from C/N, and was on a secondary journal, among other activities. Due to a number of reasons (mostly my interests), I did not do litigation my first year, but switched in later (and thus did not apply to clerkships before I began working). My experience since has been great, and I have very good recommendations from partners at my firm. I think my professor recommendations are less stellar.

I sent around 80 applications (district courts) more than three weeks ago and have not heard a peep. I really want to clerk for a federal court, and would do so anywhere. I had thought my credentials were competitive, but it seems not, and I was hoping for some advice. In terms of what I can see as drawbacks to my application: I did not take all of the standard "lit" classes in law school, but the classes I did take were certainly not easy (and almost all were large lectures). I am also applying for positions where I would be quite far out of law school were I to be accepted. And finally, I have spent most of my life in one place (a large city), so my application may look odd to a judge in a far away state. Would it be worthwhile to discuss these points in my cover letter?

One other thought I had was whether it would be worthwhile to apply to magistrates.

Thank you in advance--and any advice is appreciated.

Does this mean you'd likely be clerking as a 5th year? If that's the case, I definitely would not apply to magistrates if I were you.

What term(s) are you applying for?

Also, three weeks isn't long.

Thanks both--I have been applying for 2017 and 2018--basically anything that pops up on OSCAR.

Any particular reason why a magistrate clerkship would not make sense?

Give it some time. You'll likely get some bites. I got 4 interviews in quick succession about 4-6 weeks after starting my applications. Just keep applying as you see judges pop up that you're interested in.

It's really premature to conclude that you're having a difficult time getting interviews. Three weeks isn't long and 80 applications isn't that many, particularly if you're truly willing to go anywhere (the universe is vast - there are about 670 authorized district judgeships and 170 authorized circuit judgeships, and I'm pretty sure those figures don't include senior judges, although obviously some of those are vacant, hire permanent clerks only, only hire right out of law school, etc.).

I certainly wouldn't take it as a sign that you should start using your cover letter to highlight perceived 'weaknesses' in your application. If a judge is willing to let you explain a weakness, (s)he'll let you do it in the interview if you're otherwise a strong candidate. If the judge thinks it's a dealbreaker that (e.g.) you've never set foot in Nebraska or you didn't take Evidence, there's not much you can do to change that. Just keep at it a little longer, and send out an app to anyone who you'd consider clerking with.

Honestly, you might be late for 2017, though if you really want a clerkship, you can try a magistrate judge in SDNY or whichever market you want to work in, and then use it to get a District Court one for 2018.

Aside from that, you seem like a good candidate. I'm also an alum applying with very similar stats to yours, though I started about 6 weeks ago and have had 7. The interviews usually came within a couple days or a week of sending out my application.

I'm not an associate at a firm, but I just don't see the value in leaving as a mid-level associate to clerk for a mag judge. I very much doubt it'll improve your employment prospects in any way, and it's a huge pay cut, plus you probably won't learn that much from a mag judge clerkship after litigating at a firm for years already.

Hi all,

This is OP. I don't have anything to add, but I wanted to send my thanks for the responses. Seems like I just have to keep at it.

I was in a similar situation to you -- applied as an alum and clerking now, in what would have been my fourth year as an associate. My experience tells me two things:

First, you are applying late if you are looking at '17 and maybe even for '18. I was hired two years and change before I started. My SDNY chambers is already full for '19. I do know that there are some judges -- including, if I'm not mistaken, Chief Judge Irizarri in the EDNY -- who hire ~6 months out, so try to find out who those judges are and contact chambers to see when they will be interviewing.

Second, you probably need someone to make a personal recommendation to the judge. If you have good relationships with senior partners who know judges, who with partners/senior associates who clerked for current judges, ask those partners if they would consider reaching out to those judges. If you are at DPW/CSM/S&C in NYC, there should be plenty of connections like that that you can take advantage of.

Fed mag clerk here, what are you looking to do after a clerkship? If private sector, I can't imagine a mag clerkship would put you in a better position than being a 5th year from a v10 or whatever you're at. If gov, then it might be helpful, but seems pretty risky.

FascinatedWanderer wrote:I'm not an associate at a firm, but I just don't see the value in leaving as a mid-level associate to clerk for a mag judge. I very much doubt it'll improve your employment prospects in any way, and it's a huge pay cut, plus you probably won't learn that much from a mag judge clerkship after litigating at a firm for years already.

So, two things: First, leaving as a fifth year to clerk at the district court (for either a district judge or mag judge) is probably not the right move unless you are planning on moving cities and using the clerkship to build some credibility with local firms, particularly with those in insular markets. It's not that it wouldn't be a positive and good experience for you (you will almost certainly learn more in one year of clerking than you can pick up in 4-5 at a firm), but it's that you likely won't be improving your employment prospects much or really be seen to be advancing your career. It's true that a clerkship is a great credential, but if you are looking to switch firms, potential employers are going to be a lot more focused on what litigation experience (like taking deps, etc.) you already have and can bring to the table. Not sure if this is your experience, but at most big firms, getting a lot of tangible experience in years 1-4 can be difficult. And if you leave the firm with little tangible experience, clerking will just not add much in terms of how employers see your skill set. To give you an example, one of my co-clerks was a biglaw refugee with really great credentials and I just remember she had a pretty difficult time finding a post-clerkship position. She didn't find one until 4 months after the clerkship ended. This is not to say don't do it, but just be wary if anyone is telling you that finding a job post-clerkship is "easy."

Second point goes to the above comment about mag judges. I clerked -- both for a mag judge and a district judge -- and I have to say I don't really get this comment. True, there is a consensus (however right or wrong) that mag is less prestigious, so that is obviously something to consider, but I think it's wrong to say "you probably won't learn that much from a mag judge clerkship after litigating at a firm for years already." I know this board believes that all mag judges do is discovery, but the idea that mag clerks are just sitting around all day reading interrogatories, going through in camera review of priv docs, and resolving discovery disputes is ludicrous. Sure there is some of that, but mag judges deal with a variety of pre-trial matters and also generally have a whole range of consent cases where they are deciding motions to dismiss, summary judgment, and many other dispositive, substantive motions. During my mag clerkship for example, I had three trials. Moving to a district judge was a great experience, but honestly I actually had less exposure to the overall process because stuff was just generally referred out to the mags until summary judgment. It was more solitary and I didn't get to see cases develop in the way I did when I was a mag clerk. If you're clerking just for employment prospects mag is probably not your best bet (unless you're going to be in a really competitive and prestigious district) but just offered this perspective as some food for thought.

Agree with anon above's conclusion that clerking now has little value for your career.

Anonymous User wrote:

FascinatedWanderer wrote: I know this board believes that all mag judges do is discovery, but the idea that mag clerks are just sitting around all day reading interrogatories, going through in camera review of priv docs, and resolving discovery disputes is ludicrous.

This varies by district depending on the district judges' referral practices. The magistrates in my district largely do just these things. If others come across this thread while deciding whether to clerk for a mag., make sure to talk to former clerks and others in the district to figure out what types of motions the mag decides.