Work has slowed. Why would firms continue to hire at the same pace as they did when there was an abundence of work? Clerk hiring logically would be one of the first places where this would be noticed because its the easiest place for firms to slow down hiring without anyone (but the clerks) noticing (the other is lateral hiring, which also has slowed).

Bottom line, it's never good to be looking for a job when firms are looking to cut costs.

8:54 -- not you, bc you couldn't get one.

I am in the early stages of my job search with zero luck thus far. Perhaps law clerk hiring has slowed...or maybe it's just me.

Does Gibson treat all clerkships equally? Would, say, a magistrate clerk receive the same bonus as, say, a district or circuit court clerk?

C'mon, are you serious? Gibson doesn't hire magistrate clerks.

If law firm want to slow hiring period, then you would think that clerk hiring would also see a slowdown, but cutting clerks seems the least logical place to stop. If it's the bonus that's preventing the hiring (and seriously, if $50 is going ot make or break the firm, then it has bigger problems) then just don't offer it. Or distinguish between types of clerkships. A magistrate clerkship might be (and in often cases, probably is) a better experience than a COA clerkship, but the COA clerkship is harder to get. The Firm will get fewer clerks through market forces, no doubt, but why categorically exclude clerks?

This would be put in the same category as encouraging attrition by capping year-end performance-based boni and making life mizerable for associates across the board. You typically want to attrition from the bottom of the associate or candidate pool, not the top.

NYC market: I went to a top-tier school, did well, worked at a V15 firm before dist ct clerkship here. I have sent out numerous applications and gotten several interviews. My sense is pre-downturn, I would've gotten many more interviews. How are other clerks doing in NYC market?

Several firms in DC have said that they are not hiring clerks for this fall.

Several Chicago firms are not hiring clerks for this Fall, either.

I am a magistrate clerk and have gotten several interviews, and I just started sending out my resume last month. You all need to stop worrying.

Clerks should take this as a blessing; makes it easier to end up at one of the best places. The big dogs who still have tons of great litigation work are still hiring. Slowdown? What slowdown?

A lot of firms in DC aren't hiring clerks or laterals. They need to make sure there's enough work for the associates they have before they hire more.

It's pretty simple, the clerkship hiring hierarchy is this:

1) SCOTUS (duh)
2) Fed Cir Ct
3) State Supreme Ct (important state, e.g. NY, Cal, Tex, Ill, maybe Fla, or your own state if you're going for a regional firm)
4) Fed D Ct (important districts)
5) State Supreme Ct (less important states)
6) Fed D. Ct (less important districts)
7) All other Fed Cts
8) All other State Cts
9) Magistrate Ct
10) Traffic Ct

Federal district court clerkships carry more prestige than clerksips with state supreme courts in almost all cases.

11:09 = obvious state court troll

I have to agree with 11:09: Appellate work > District Court scutwork.

Most district court judges are assclowns who don't give a rat's ass. It doesn't matter what you do anyway, 11:17, because the case is going to get appealed and your incoherent conclusions of the state of the law that were drawn up at 3AM are going to be found woefully inadequate by ME.

Wow that clerkship hierarchy order is totally off for biglaw. There are some biglaw firms that don't even pay bonuses for state clerks.

I hope you're not actually a clerk, 11:30. You bring shame to your court.

Why does this board inevitably devolve into a d*ck measuring contest?

Any thoughts on clerkships with bankruptcy judges? I keep hearing bankruptcy is heating up...

David, you should look into the clerkship bonus market for laterals, i.e., is there one. If you get paid a clerkship bonus immediately after your clerkship and then lateral to a new firm a couple years later, are there firms that will pay you another bonus or part of a bonus?

REAL hierarchy:

1) SCOTUS
2) Fed. COA
3) Fed. D. Ct.
4) State Supreme
5) Fed. Bankr.
6) Fed. Magistrate

No other clerkship deserves to be ranked

I concur with 11:48. I think most law firms do as well.

I agree with 11:32--11:30 is wrong and probably not even a clerk. Law clerks in this circuit would never make such uninformed comments. If you actually were a law clerk, you would realize that the district court is affirmed in the vast majority of cases.

I agree with the 11:48 hierarchy with the caveat that I have been told by federal and circuit judges as well as partners at biglaw firms that a state clerkship at an 'important' state is on par with a federal district court clerkship - particularly when the state closely tracks federal law.

Not that it really matters beyond Fed. Dist. Ct. all that much, but I respectfully disagree regarding the hierarchy. State Supreme is generally irrelevant unless you want to practice in that state. That means that if you clerked for the NY Court of Appeals, that clerkship is only worth more than say, a Fed. Mag. clerkship in New York. Anywhere else in the country, the fed. clerkship is more transferable and prestigious. Hell, from what I've seen, most firms don't even offer a bonus for anything but a fed clerkship.

Likewise, Fed. Bankruptcy is only useful if you want to practice Bankruptcy. In that niche, it's incredibly useful. In anything else, its at the bottom of the totem pole.

Finally, there are always questions about whether bonuses will be paid for Art. I clerkships. I suspect that if you get hired, you'd get the bonus. Whether you get hired or not will depend on you and the firm. Some firms will hold on to their interpretation of the prestige levels offered in these comments, and may or may not value your experience. Other firms will value it greatly. Either way, I find it hard to believe that you wouldn't get the bonus if you were hired. Most of the firms use vague language like "federal clerks" when describing the bonuses, and even the ones that say "federal district clerks" wouldn't exclude magistrate clerks (though it may exclude bankruptcy). The whole prestige thing is ridiculous anyways - all it measures is the perceived difficulty of getting the job, not the caliber of work. In the district I'm clerking in (east coast), the mag. clerks do a lot more than the dist. ct. clerks (everything the dist. ct. clerks do + more). Perhaps that is different in other districts, since I've heard in some that magistrate are basically relegated to social security and habeas stuff. However, like everything else in the law, the appearance is more important than the substance (i.e., where you clerked, where you went to school), which is troubling.

I really think that the purported trouble of clerks getting jobs is attributable to response bias in the comments. It's like posting a blog entry asking, "Who out there has financial problems?" Lo and behold, those who answer are those who have money problems. It doesn't meant that most people are having those same types of problems, or that these problems are any greater this year as opposed to last year.

The fact that clerkship bonuses are increasing is better evidence of the condition of the market.

clerk hiring is slow because all hiring is slow. the clerkship bonus is irrelevant to the issue. if a firm wants litigators at a certain level, they'll almost uniformly prefer candidates at that level with prior federal clerkship experience over candidates without. the extra $35k or $50k or even $70k won't enter into it if they need someone at that level.

keep in mind that if you are currently clerking and came straight out of law school, you're essentially competing with this year's 3L class, which we already know got more no-offers than usual. right now, lots of firms simply have no need whatsoever for an additional jr. litigator with no experience starting next september, regardless of clerkships.

if business picks up, so will hiring. there's really no need to have a job lined up nine months in advance anyway. for the most part, jr. lawyers at biglaw are the only people in the world who have that luxury. laterals often make a move on less than a month or two months of notice.

Bringing the focus back on Gibson, I summered at Gibson, am currently clerking for a magistrate judge, and have clerkships set up with a district court judge and a circuit court judge. Gibson is holding my job open, and I expect to receive at best two clerkship bonuses (no bonus for magistrate clerkship), although it may end up only being one bonus.

2:01 -- that's a pretty stellar line-up (i.e., mag, dist, and cir)

11:09,

you forgot:

11) The People's Court

Gibson's clerk bonus is not given for Magistrate clerkships.

"Federal Courts" = Federal District Court or Court of Appeals. If a firm offers a bonus for state clerkships, it will say "State highest court." That's it.

Agree with 11:48.

And from what I have seen, many firms give Bankruptcy Clerks bonuses when they are hiring for the bankruptcy section.