Judicial Clerkships From Hell: Submissions, Please
Check out the woman at right. She is the Honorable Dolores K. Sloviter, and she sits on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
Judge Sloviter seems like a kindly old lady, doesn’t she? We’ve seen her on the bench, at multiple oral arguments. Based on her grandmotherly appearance, we once quipped to a colleague: “She seems so nice! When is she going to descend from the bench and feed us homemade cookies?”
Answer: not anytime soon (unless the cookies are laced with arsenic). From one of Judge Sloviter’s former clerks, Professor Mike Rappaport:
In 1985, having just graduated from law school, I arrived for my first day of work as a law clerk to Dolores K. Sloviter of the Third Circuit….My two co-clerks, who had arrived a week earlier, took me to lunch. I asked how things were going, and they looked kind of uncomfortable. They explained that on their first day, a week earlier, they had gone to lunch with the holdover clerk, and had asked her, almost making small talk, how her year had been. [T]hey listened as she spent the next hour and a half detailing the horrors of the experience, and how she wasn’t sure how she had gotten through it.
That law clerk’s year of hell turned out to be quite similar to our year….
(That’s just an excerpt. You can read the entire post by clicking here.)
But should any of this come as a surprise? As regular ATL readers surely recall, Dolores Sloviter is the alleged inspiration for the nightmarish Judge Helga Friedman, central villain of Saira Rao’s delightful new novel, Chambermaid.
Additional thoughts on hellacious clerkships, plus a call for reader tips, after the jump.
Professor Rappaport’s description of his unfortunate clerkship experience led to this discussion by Professor Ilya Somin, over at the Volokh Conspiracy (excerpts):
This raises the more general issue of how clerkship applicants can avoid [abusive and nightmarish] judges, or at least know what to expect if they accept clerkships with them. One possible way is to talk to the judge’s former clerks. Unfortunately, however, ex-clerks have strong incentives to avoid saying anything negative about their judges. Even if the judge is a complete troll, his or her name is going to be listed on the ex-clerk’s resume for years to come, and prospective employers are likely to call up the judge for a reference….Another potential source of information is ex-clerks for other judges on same court…. Unlike criticizing your own judge, commenting negatively on another judge isn’t likely to cause serious damage to an ex-clerks’ career prospects. Therefore, you have a better chance of getting an honest answer.
There are probably other ways to get information on judges’ treatment of their staff. But I can’t think of an equally promising one that is likely to be readily available to clerkship applicants.
Never fear, Above the Law is here! We’re happy to serve as a clearinghouse for your clerkship horror stories.
Email us with your tales of clerkship woe. We will confirm that you actually clerked for the judge in question (or were otherwise properly situated to acquire such dirt). We will then post your horror story, but without identifying you as our tipster, per our standard procedure. (Of course, if you for some bizarre reason WANT to be credited, we can do that too.)
Judges are public figures, and they’re used to being criticized. But sometimes even judges sue for libel. So — and this should go without saying — only send us stories that are TRUE.
Please send your stories of clerkship hell to us by email (subject line: “Clerkship From Hell”). Thanks!
The Clerkship from Hell [The Right Coast]
Judicial Clerkships From Hell [Volokh Conspiracy]
Chambermaid: A Novel [Amazon.com]
(65) Comments
Comments
Ms. Sloviter, please stop hiring top school grads who don't appreciate the opportunity you give them. They don't want the job, they don't want to work in the legal profession (outside of writing books or teaching in the scam known as tier 2/3/4 law schools) and will only stab you in the back.
Instead, look towards tier 2.
Loyola 2L
This is nothing short of an elaborate plug for a book I have no interest in. The post linked has two big excerpts from "Chambermaid"/reviews, the rest of the info is useless. We get it, that judge sucks.
She's an old-time ambassador
Of sweet talking, night walking games
And she's known in the darkest clubs
For pushing ahead of the dames
If she says she can do it
Then she can do it,
she don't make false claims
But she's a Queen,
and such are queens
That your laughter
is sucked in their brains
Now she's leading him on
And she'll lay him right down
But it could have been me
Yes, it could have been me
Why didn't I say,
why didn't I say, no, no, no
I have a very low opinion of Ms. Rao. I view her as someone like Ms. Rao, who wishes to make money by stabbing someone who tried to help in the back.
I don't understand why certain families don't teach their children honor.
5:19 - again but in English this time?
me no rikey rao
5:20 - gimme the keys you fucking cocksucker, what the fuck?
1. Chambermaid is a novel. FICTION. What is wrong with writing a novel that is loosely based on your real life? "Write what you know," etc.
2. Why isn't Saira Rao like a whistleblower? Someone who is willing to expose the misdeeds of the powerful?
5:21 displaying the essential correctness of top tier law firm's decision to hire primarily those graduating from top 15 (or so) law schools.
5:23, a.k.a. Sara Rao or her publicist.
Someone who ridicules a judge for profit is not a whistleblower.
I dont see what makes either of these people dishonorable or ungrateful--they're just telling Bad Boss stories, which are probably Worldwide Conversation Topic # 4 after the weather, real estate, and how your kids are doing. It's only noteworthy because federal judges have managed to create this code of silence among their clerks. I think there are very good arguments to be made that clerks should not talk about judges' deliberations, etc. without a really good reason, but why shouldn't they be able to talk about how they are as employers, just like everybody else does?
It's sad that some people don't understand ethics, unless they're the victim.
I'm sure someone you trusted could write a book about you Jenny, if you're ever important enough to warrant one.
Is it ethical to treat your employees as if they weren't human beings? Is it ethical for an elderly woman to be making decisions that shape our common law?
"s it ethical for an elderly woman to be making decisions that shape our common law"
What the hell is your problem with elderly women?
And when didn't she treat someone "like a human being?"
"Is it ethical to treat your employees as if they weren't human beings?"
Yes, if they're superficial, narcissistic and whiny.
"What the hell is your problem with elderly women?"
Nothing when they're handing me gum or sweets from their "candy drawer"
rofl
Chambermaid is a shitty book. Don't read it.
I clerked for the most arrogant, self-righteous monster of a man one could ever hope to meet.
What made the experience especially frustrating was that everybody thought the judge was so nice and sweet because he was able to hide all of his horrible features behind a warm and genial smile in public.
In the privacy of his chambers, he was a rude, impatient, dismissive, reactionary beast.
I was so pleased when he found himself in an embarrassing mess that implicated the worst elements of his personality....
Ah, the euphoria of shadenfraud and its many delights.
why all the negative coverage? what about posts about excellent judges?
Well, sadly, no one wants to read about excellent judges. But if Lat wants stories about them, I'm sure they'll abound. Clerks will be much more willing to sing the praises of their judges than to risk being caught dishing dirt.
Incidentally, Judge Cole on the 6th Circuit is an especially excellent and friendly judge (and I don't clerk for him).
That's the L2L commentary I was missing. Now, could you guys please keep doing the "First!" thing? I've come to the conclusion that these documents ARE going to review themselves, so entertain me!
6:03 -- The term is schadenfreude. I would expect former federal clerks to know not to use words in an argument that are beyond their abilities. Otherwise, your post reeks of potboiler fiction.
My posts usually reek of pot.
Dave, all kidding aside, I really think you owe it to your loyal readers to disclose the nature of your relationship with the author here.
spelling is for losers
Anonymous 6:03
Are you talking about a certain Dis. Ct. judge from the West Coast?
The author is a normal, likable person who turned her crappy experience into a good book. Instead of quitting like one of her clerks before her, she kept her nose to the grind and perhaps naively, kept hoping it would get better. I liken her to a whistleblower (who contrary to an above poster's statement) does get paid.
I have no affiliation with the book or author.
I interned for DKS and she was hell on wheels. The book is no exaggeration.
6:24: If Lat and Rao are friends, yawn. Lat is friends with half the people he writes about (e.g. all those DOJ people).
I doubt the "relationship" is anything more than that:
1. Rao is married.
2. Lat doesn't play for her team anyway.
6:46--my thoughts exactly--but can you think of any other likely candidates?
6:03 please confirm if you read this.
It does not hurt to hear a former clerk's story. Judicial clerks are in a "club" and tend to smile a speak highly of their judge when this may be far from the truth. Maybe her story will let current clerks that are suffering through hell know that they are not alone and are not imagining their "hell."
This book may also serve as a warning to those third year law students who are getting their applications ready for the September judicial clerkship application process.
It may help clerks who decide not to become lawyers---they can just marry someone solvent and try their hands at bad writing.
"My experience as a clerk for Judge Dolores Sloviter of the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit was especially valuable because I was fortunate enough to work for an experienced, highly intelligent, hard-working, and skilled judge who takes her job very seriously.
Additionally, I liked the judge a lot, learned a great deal from her, and found myself agreeing with her on most issues."
In 1986, Scottoline stepped away from practice to raise her daughter and to begin writing her first novel. But an unforeseen divorce from her husband pushed Scottoline into circumstances worthy of dramatic fiction. She was suddenly a single mother, unemployed and living on credit cards in hope that a publishing deal would come through.
When she hit her self-determined debt limit in 1991 and there was no publishing deal in sight, Scottoline applied for a clerk position she had heard the Hon. Dolores K. Sloviter (L’56, Chief Judge of the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals) had open for a woman or man in a career transition.
“I begged her for the job. When she gave it to me I had to keep myself from bursting into tears. Judge Sloviter saved my butt. I was a single mother – I couldn’t work full-time. She changed my life. She’s done so much for women that I don’t think people know enough about.”
One month later Scottoline sold her first book to a publishing house. But it would take two years before she would believe the success of that novel was here to stay and she quit her job in order to write full-time. “Everywhere That Mary Went” was nominated in 1994 for a prestigious Edgar Award from the Mystery Writers of America for best original paperback. But it would be her second novel, “Final Appeal” that would garner her the award.
“Final Appeal” is set in the Third Circuit. Judge Sloviter hosted a signing party at her chambers to celebrate that book’s publication. She invited all the judges of the Third Circuit and ordered that they had to buy the book if they attended. “I was signing books for Third Circuit Court [judges]!” Scottoline exclaims with remaining awe at the change in her fortunes. “The first book signing of my life was in that court!”
If my judge doesn't convince the biglaw firm I've signed onto to raise its clerkship bonus, I'm totally going to obliterate him in the press. I feel a chapter coming on now.
Outgoing clerks, are you with me!!!?
Chambermaid was a good read. It wasn't earth-shattering, but I did laugh out loud a number of times.
I think the book also serves the valuable function of trying to get people in our profession to lighten-the-hell-up sometimes. We can be a self-important lot. (Caveat - I wouldn't have written the book with so many parallels to my actual clerkship experience, since I think it runs the risk of becoming too personal, BUT I thought it was pretty good).
Another nightmare -- Judge Conlon on the Northern District of Illinois. Research her. There are weird stories. Firing clerks the week before they start. Forcing law student interns to sit outside her office on the floor in the hallway as punishment for alleged misbehavior. . .
To clarify: I don't have firsthand knowledge. I've just heard weird stories about Judge Conlon. A lot of weird stories.
Be careful, commenters. There are lessons to be learned from the AutoAdmit lawsuit......
I have stories that I could tell about my judge, but they would be recognizable to other former (and/or current) clerks. And why should I risk that, when there's no telling who would report back to our judge and who would not.
Two words:
Pandora's Box.
Bust out the popcorn folks, this is going to get real ugly.
Chambermaid was poorly written and not entertaining in the slightest. Even setting aside the problems I have with the author's ethics and judgment, I found plenty of reasons to dislike (and be utterly bored by) the book on its own merit.
i am bewildered by the amount of vitriol directed at saira rao in the aftermath of chambermaid's publication. i can only conclude that it has something to do with envy (everyone knows most lawyers secretly want to quit their jobs and do something they enjoy, often...writing); sexism (this level of spite has never been leveled at other legal tell-all authors, e.g., that fellow who wrote anonymous law firm); or racism (ditto see also all of the mocking comments using fake indian names, not to mention comments like 5:21's).
the book is not pulitzer material -- but it doesn't aspire to be. it delivers exactly what it promises, some great laughs and a window into a (fictionalized) clerkship experience. the claims of ethical violations are absurd: this is fiction; rao has not divulged any great secrets entrusted her by her (real) judge. so what gives?
and no, i'm not her publicist.
I seriously do not understand the anger at Rao out there. What makes judges so special that they're so different from every other branch of the government? No one ever complains when former employees of the executive or legislative branches write "fictional" or non-fictional accounts about high-level figures of government. All this judge-worship is ridiculous. They're the most unaccountable branch of the government, and if one lifetime appointed federal judge wants to treat her employees as slaves, what is wrong with exposing that? Everyone who's clerked in the 3rd Circuit knows about DKS and what a miserable, awful woman she is.
Just enjoy the book and stop worrying about some non-existent code of silence that's supposed to surround these federal judges. It's very funny and worth reading.
I've heard Judge Cook on the Sixth Circuit is also a bit of a nightmare.
"I think the book also serves the valuable function of trying to get people in our profession to lighten-the-hell-up sometimes. We can be a self-important lot."
- That quote for a previous poster sums it all up perfectly.
The bottom line is, this was a well-written, funny book! Rao did a great job at entertaining and it's a great read for lawyers and non-lawyers alike. If she chose to write something loosely based on personal experience, how is that so different from the thousands of other authors out there that do the same?
The bottom line is, the book is just flat out a highly entertaining read. If you have a problem with criticizing a clerkship, don't read the book. Let the rest of us enjoy it in peace!
6:46--my thoughts exactly--but can you think of any other likely candidates?
6:03 please confirm if you read this.
Posted by: anon | July 11, 2007 07:23 PM
===============
Shhhh! our friend is always wa
6:46--my thoughts exactly--but can you think of any other likely candidates?
6:03 please confirm if you read this.
Posted by: anon | July 11, 2007 07:23 PM
===============
Shhhh! Our friend is always watching.
Judge Dolores Sloviter of the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit is the kindest, warmest, bravest, most wonderful human being I have ever known in my life.
David, back when I was in law school and clerking, the SDNY grapevine was that there were three absolutely reptilian judges at whose chambers one accepted a clerkship only with the utmost trepidation: Irving Ben Cooper, David Edelstein and (on the Second Circuit) Irving Kaufman. I believe all three are now deceased, but if you can track down former clerks from those three you probably will get some very very juicy tidbits.
DKS is a cruel and spiteful thing, however sweet she may work to appear in public.
Plentiful evidence of DKS's wickedness exists in the opinions she has authored for the Third Circuit. In many such opinions, both published and unpublished, DKS needlessly berates and insults the district court judge whose efforts the appeals court is reviewing.
If DKS so happily showers unjustified (and certainly unnecessary) vitriol on her fellow Article III judges, just IMAGINE how she treats her lowly clerks.
Anyone who has ever known any of sloviter's clerks knows that any and all tales about her are (1) true and (2) justified. She is cruel, petty, and irrational. She sucks the will to live out of her clerks -- I watched it happen to three of them in two different terms. I firmly believe in the clerks' code of honor, but her behavior transcends it.
whatever about Chambermaid. where's the actual gossip at? I don't want to hear "oh this judge is so horrible!" without some juicy stories to go with
10:25 - You're wrong to point to Judge Cook (6th Circuit). She is a fantastic woman and gets along with her clerks marvelously (and no, I am not one of them but I know a few and I have interacted with her personally). I think it is Judge Clay (6th Circuit) you are thinking of. Everyone in the 6th Circuit knows about him and stays away (I applied to all the 6th Circuit judges except him).
12:29 - what is so bad about Judge Clay?
Judge Clay treats his clerks (and all his staff) terribly and he is notorious for (at least once) firing his entire staff out of the blue just because he had a bad day. Some law schools advise against applying for a clerkship in his chambers and some professors who know about the horror stories refuse to write recommendation letters to his chambers because they don't want any law school student they think highly enough to write a recommendation letter for going through that experience. And I have seen Clay clerks on a number of occasions--they always look miserable.
I know for a fact that Clay has never fired his entire staff for any reason, let alone because he had a bad day. From what I've heard, he works hard and expects his clerks to work very hard as well (which might explain why they look so miserable), but he's fair and respectful to everyone who works for him. He's also apparently very supportive of past clerks and writes glowing recommendations
10:44 a.m. -- Excellent Manchurian Candidate reference!
I am REALLY REALLY interested in who 6:03 is talking about. REALLY.
Judge Clay is a nightmare to work for. Trust me.
I'm shocked to hear of all the horrible clerking experiences. I, on the other hand, have clerked for two wonderful judges as a term clerk and am now clerking permanently for a third federal judge and love it! If you are looking for a great judge to work for... maybe you should try the South-East. I have had no trouble here and can honestly say that every judge in our courthouse appears to be friendly, intelligent, and conscientious. I cannot imagine working for a judge like the nutcase in Rao's book
I agree that Judge Cook on the Sixth Circuit has a reputation for being VERY good to her clerks, so I suspect that poster was thinking of Clay. I disagree with Cook's perspective on the law, but she's a really nice lady and all of her clerks that I've met have loved the experience.
Judge Edwards (DC) is a monster . . . apparently.
Why has no one mentioned any Kozinski clerkship horror stories?