Top Law Schools

I'd love some advice from this group. I just got a district court clerkship at one of the more prestigious courts (think DDC/NDCal/SDNY). My judge asked if I'm interested in pursuing an appellate clerkship for the following term. Honestly, I wasn't really planning on it-- I think the district court will give me great experience and everything I'd want out of a clerkship. For personal reasons as well, I'm a slightly older law student (early 30s) and heading into BigLaw, and not super inclined to take the paycut two years in a row given my other financial obligations-- and my husband's career constraints mean we're in an SF/DC/NY-esque city for the foreseeable future (i.e. an appellate clerkship would be insanely competitive if I'm trying not to move) but my judge suggested that for someone with my career goals (long term, PI-focused impact lit) it would be silly not to do an appellate clerkship. I don't want to do it just for the sake of raking in more gold stars but I also don't want to cut myself out if it's actually a credential I'll need. I'd love any advice!

Anonymous User wrote:I'd love some advice from this group. I just got a district court clerkship at one of the more prestigious courts (think DDC/NDCal/SDNY). My judge asked if I'm interested in pursuing an appellate clerkship for the following term. Honestly, I wasn't really planning on it-- I think the district court will give me great experience and everything I'd want out of a clerkship. For personal reasons as well, I'm a slightly older law student (early 30s) and heading into BigLaw, and not super inclined to take the paycut two years in a row given my other financial obligations-- and my husband's career constraints mean we're in an SF/DC/NY-esque city for the foreseeable future (i.e. an appellate clerkship would be insanely competitive if I'm trying not to move) but my judge suggested that for someone with my career goals (long term, PI-focused impact lit) it would be silly not to do an appellate clerkship. I don't want to do it just for the sake of raking in more gold stars but I also don't want to cut myself out if it's actually a credential I'll need. I'd love any advice!

Congrats on your prestigious district clerkship!

First, if your judge is well-connected and ends up liking you, you may very well be in the catbird seat re: scoring a CoA clerkship. Don't sell yourself short; yes, 2/9/especially DC are insanely competitive, but so are DDC/NDCA/SDNY clerkships!

Second, IMO your judge is right. The kind of job you want - impact lit - is exactly the type of job that most values a fancy CoA clerkship credential. If you were interested in generic BigLaw/in-house, or generic PI work, I'd advise foregoing the second clerkship, but impact PI is just as competitive (probably even more so) as fancy clerkships, and they highly value the credential. (Partly because the credential helps - you'd actually be litigating in those courts, after all - and partly because those employers have enough applicant demand that they get to be choosy.)

For what it's worth, my COA judge is of the opinion that appellate clerkships prepare attorneys for practice better than district court clerkships because appellate work highlights what types of errors lose a case, both at trial and on appeal, whereas district courts tend to get bogged down just babysitting attorneys who don't play well with others.

Elite clerkships also have this weird club feel. There are reunions and dinners and retirement parties and people give speeches about when they were clerking at 27 or w/e into advanced age. Is it weird? Yes. Do you have to participate in that sort of thing? No. Does it exist and is it beneficial for certain types of people (especially in places with high densities of those types of ppl, like DC)? Yes.

Anonymous User wrote:For what it's worth, my COA judge is of the opinion that appellate clerkships prepare attorneys for practice better than district court clerkships because appellate work highlights what types of errors lose a case, both at trial and on appeal, whereas district courts tend to get bogged down just babysitting attorneys who don't play well with others.

It prepares you better for appellate work. But for trial work? Nah. I can't speak to other districts, but we don't spend a lot of time babysitting bickering attorneys. It happens from time to time, but it's not that typical or time consuming.

lavarman84 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:For what it's worth, my COA judge is of the opinion that appellate clerkships prepare attorneys for practice better than district court clerkships because appellate work highlights what types of errors lose a case, both at trial and on appeal, whereas district courts tend to get bogged down just babysitting attorneys who don't play well with others.

It prepares you better for appellate work. But for trial work? Nah. I can't speak to other districts, but we don't spend a lot of time babysitting bickering attorneys. It happens from time to time, but it's not that typical or time consuming.

Yeah, I disagree with your judge’s take. If you do any dispositive motions while clerking in district court (most clerks do lots), you’ll learn plenty about the kinds of errors that lose cases. You might not learn that much about appellate error specifically, but very few cases get appealed, and the state of the record is usually critical to the outcome. In terms of preparation for what most lawyers do, district court is probably closer.

I agree that getting into the network of people who clerked can be very valuable. Don’t discount the value of the relationship with the second judge, too. Having another judge who will make a call for you, write you a recommendation, or just keep an ear out for interesting opportunities can be of huge value. Does every judge do that? No, probably not. But I think many do.

Can I piggyback in here -- Does anyone have thoughts on the reverse situation, if adding a D.Ct. clerkship on-top a prestigious COA is worth the cost/delay for those with similar career goals? Obviously impact lit requires... lit, so it's never a bad thing, and working with another judge would be great. Are the networks surrounding D.Ct. as comparably tight-knit as some appellate ones?

District court clerk networks can definitely be close knit and having the extra judge relationship can be useful. Also I think that the district court clerking experience is more helpful overall for a litigation position than COA, honestly. You will see trials and hearings and get to be involved in so many aspects of the litigation. It’s also really fun (more so than clerking for the COA).

Hijacking this thread a bit:

If I have 2 district court clerkships lined up, or 2 appellate clerkships lined up, what's the value of taking a third year to do whichever level I haven't done yet?

there’s no value to a third clerkship unless it’s SCOTUS or you want to be a career clerk

Anonymous User wrote:Hijacking this thread a bit:

If I have 2 district court clerkships lined up, or 2 appellate clerkships lined up, what's the value of taking a third year to do whichever level I haven't done yet?

If you have 2 CoA clerkships lined up, definitely don't do an additional district court clerkship.

If you have 2 district court clerkships lined up, and your CoA clerkship is a particularly prestigious one (D.C./feeder 2/9), and you have specific career goals that would be advanced by getting that brass ring (academia, appellate practice, impact lit), then bite the bullet and do the CoA clerkship. Otherwise, don't do it.