Clerks Taking Questions

lolwat
Posts: 678
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2018 2:06 am

Re: Clerks Taking Questions

Post by lolwat » Wed Jul 03, 2019 11:14 am

I wouldn't bracket if I didn't have to.
Also, you're going to have a cover note for your writing sample, right? I don't know if everybody does it, but I had a cover page that gave some basic information, such as what the writing sample is about, that I had permission to use it (if work product), and so on. You could explain redactions and generic names and such in that letter and make your actual writing sample read as smoothly as it would a regular work product.

HLSAnon

Re: Clerks Taking Questions

Post by HLSAnon » Sat Jul 06, 2019 7:13 pm

I'm a rising 2L somewhere in the top 10% at HLS (most likely closer to 10% cutoff than 5%) and interested in clerking in a major city. How much thought should I be giving to course selection? I'm currently slated for Corps and Tax (with 2 serious seminars and one kind of BS one) in the fall but may drop tax, leaving me with only one BLL course, three seminars, and a pass/fail clinic I arranged. Then I have Crim Pro Investigations and 14th lined up in the spring. Planning on taking Fed Cts., Admin., Evidence, Sec. Reg., and maybe Crim Pro (adjudication) 3L, with the remaining credits filled up by seminars. Is this a bad strategy for clerkships? I don't want to slack but I also don't want to take things I'm not interested in; and to be frank I'm not interested in admin. and would only be taking it for clerkship opportunities. Are there any other courses I should take? Would judges look down on 33-40% of my credits being seminars/clinics? FWIW, I already did one BS seminar 1L.

lolwat
Posts: 678
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2018 2:06 am

Re: Clerks Taking Questions

Post by lolwat » Sun Jul 07, 2019 12:17 am

HLSAnon wrote:
Sat Jul 06, 2019 7:13 pm
I'm a rising 2L somewhere in the top 10% at HLS (most likely closer to 10% cutoff than 5%) and interested in clerking in a major city. How much thought should I be giving to course selection? I'm currently slated for Corps and Tax (with 2 serious seminars and one kind of BS one) in the fall but may drop tax, leaving me with only one BLL course, three seminars, and a pass/fail clinic I arranged. Then I have Crim Pro Investigations and 14th lined up in the spring. Planning on taking Fed Cts., Admin., Evidence, Sec. Reg., and maybe Crim Pro (adjudication) 3L, with the remaining credits filled up by seminars. Is this a bad strategy for clerkships? I don't want to slack but I also don't want to take things I'm not interested in; and to be frank I'm not interested in admin. and would only be taking it for clerkship opportunities. Are there any other courses I should take? Would judges look down on 33-40% of my credits being seminars/clinics? FWIW, I already did one BS seminar 1L.
Obviously people can chime in if they had a contrary experience, but IME no one really cares about what classes you've taken or what you're going to take. You'll get interviews just by being top 10% at HLS and I assume also being on Harvard Law Review. I also assume the rest of your resume isn't total shit. And that's really what 99% of judges will end up looking at in the first cut. And then the interview will 90% be about whether the judge likes you. Maybe once in a blue moon someone will ask about classes taken or planned to be taken but I think you've already covered all of your bases with your planned course load for 3L anyway. Clinics are actually easily explained by saying you wanted to gain some practical experience, and seminars can often be explained as well.

FWIW, I took fewer substantive classes than you're planning to take, opting to take a clinic, a couple seminars, a couple "Law and Fluff" classes, and the like instead. Enjoy law school (to the extent it's enjoyable)--you're already super competitive for clerkships with your stats and school.

User avatar
CS1775
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2018 5:17 am

Re: Clerks Taking Questions

Post by CS1775 » Sun Jul 07, 2019 10:41 am

Some clinics and seminars can give you an edge. If you do a judicial externship clinic, that's obviously going to be a big resume boost and talking point. One seminar I took was about appellate standards of review and my state's supreme court chief justice's permanent clerk taught the seminar: again, this is a talking point, especially now that I'm applying to courts in my state.

If Harvard has a seminar about say the history of the SJC or appellate standards of review or whatever, those are pluses.

It's also going to come down to the individual judge. Say you do a public interest externship/clinic with the local public defender. A judge who's spouse works as that public defender (or prosecutor, or law firm, or whatever) is obviously going to ask you questions about your time there. Or if a judge knows a judge you externed for, the clerkship judge will ask questions and will probably pick up the phone and call your old judge.

Dissent

Re: Clerks Taking Questions

Post by Dissent » Sun Jul 07, 2019 10:49 am

lolwat wrote:
Sun Jul 07, 2019 12:17 am
HLSAnon wrote:
Sat Jul 06, 2019 7:13 pm
I'm a rising 2L somewhere in the top 10% at HLS (most likely closer to 10% cutoff than 5%) and interested in clerking in a major city. How much thought should I be giving to course selection? I'm currently slated for Corps and Tax (with 2 serious seminars and one kind of BS one) in the fall but may drop tax, leaving me with only one BLL course, three seminars, and a pass/fail clinic I arranged. Then I have Crim Pro Investigations and 14th lined up in the spring. Planning on taking Fed Cts., Admin., Evidence, Sec. Reg., and maybe Crim Pro (adjudication) 3L, with the remaining credits filled up by seminars. Is this a bad strategy for clerkships? I don't want to slack but I also don't want to take things I'm not interested in; and to be frank I'm not interested in admin. and would only be taking it for clerkship opportunities. Are there any other courses I should take? Would judges look down on 33-40% of my credits being seminars/clinics? FWIW, I already did one BS seminar 1L.
Obviously people can chime in if they had a contrary experience, but IME no one really cares about what classes you've taken or what you're going to take. You'll get interviews just by being top 10% at HLS and I assume also being on Harvard Law Review. I also assume the rest of your resume isn't total shit. And that's really what 99% of judges will end up looking at in the first cut. And then the interview will 90% be about whether the judge likes you. Maybe once in a blue moon someone will ask about classes taken or planned to be taken but I think you've already covered all of your bases with your planned course load for 3L anyway. Clinics are actually easily explained by saying you wanted to gain some practical experience, and seminars can often be explained as well.

FWIW, I took fewer substantive classes than you're planning to take, opting to take a clinic, a couple seminars, a couple "Law and Fluff" classes, and the like instead. Enjoy law school (to the extent it's enjoyable)--you're already super competitive for clerkships with your stats and school.
My experience has been quite the opposite, both in clerkship and in firm interviews. My transcripts including specific classes, and even specific grades have come up... honestly maybe more often than not? Never in a negative way. Frequently this will happen with alums discussing a professor we had in common. I’ve also been asked favorite/least favorite class multiple times. “How did you go about selecting classes” probably 3-5 times?

Two different times an interviewer mentioned and dismissed particular less impressive grades (e.g. “oh I bet you were ticked at [professor giving B+] for ruining a near-perfect year”). I assume these were behavioral questions or legitimately unplanned.

FWIW I am not HLS, but around 10% at one of MVDP. Maybe that makes a difference, but these were across wide ranging interviews. A friend in a similar position was once grilled by a judge for not having a particular class on her schedule, well-known to be a clerking transcript checklist (to be fair, I didn’t take this and was never asked).

So more specifically: I am fairly sure I got my clerkship (2/9/DC COA) in large part due to a strong “challenging” transcript, because the judge basically said as much. It matches up with his rep (hard work! ambitious!) and I think was a tipping point for a position that was a bit of a reach for me.

I also think admin will probably be useful. And also: you may want to think about rearranging simply for the sake your 3L self... you will care a lot less!

HLS2LAnon

Re: Clerks Taking Questions

Post by HLS2LAnon » Sun Jul 07, 2019 2:23 pm

Dissent wrote:
Sun Jul 07, 2019 10:49 am
My experience has been quite the opposite, both in clerkship and in firm interviews. My transcripts including specific classes, and even specific grades have come up... honestly maybe more often than not? Never in a negative way. Frequently this will happen with alums discussing a professor we had in common. I’ve also been asked favorite/least favorite class multiple times. “How did you go about selecting classes” probably 3-5 times?

Two different times an interviewer mentioned and dismissed particular less impressive grades (e.g. “oh I bet you were ticked at [professor giving B+] for ruining a near-perfect year”). I assume these were behavioral questions or legitimately unplanned.

FWIW I am not HLS, but around 10% at one of MVDP. Maybe that makes a difference, but these were across wide ranging interviews. A friend in a similar position was once grilled by a judge for not having a particular class on her schedule, well-known to be a clerking transcript checklist (to be fair, I didn’t take this and was never asked).

So more specifically: I am fairly sure I got my clerkship (2/9/DC COA) in large part due to a strong “challenging” transcript, because the judge basically said as much. It matches up with his rep (hard work! ambitious!) and I think was a tipping point for a position that was a bit of a reach for me.

I also think admin will probably be useful. And also: you may want to think about rearranging simply for the sake your 3L self... you will care a lot less!
Everyone says I'll care a lot less 3L but I just can't see that happening right now; maybe if I had a great clerkship and job lined up, but at the same time was conclusively out of the running for SCOTUS. Also, I wasn't able to get the courses I mentioned (admin., evidence, fed courts, sec. reg.) my 2L year; Harvard has a shitty enrollment system and I want to make sure I have good profs for those imortant courses. That wasn't compatible with my enrollment priority for 2L: getting good profs for Con Law, Crim Pro, and Corps.

Dissent

Re: Clerks Taking Questions

Post by Dissent » Sun Jul 07, 2019 3:25 pm

Well you can only deal with the hand you’re dealt with scheduling. But yeah, I can’t say what the norm is but I can provide a few counterpoints to what seem to be the consensus that strength of schedule doesn’t come up.

Re: 3L that’s what I thought too, and yet :D I’d recommend pacing your schedule so as to not overburden 3L, not that you need to coast.

If you have an answer that shows you were thoughtful about your choices, that helps. But a sustained tough schedule has personally been a difference maker for me. There’s a reason some profs/clerkship offices make schedule recommendations to SCt candidates. Consider running your plans by them.

User avatar
Nony
Posts: 5561
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 2:34 pm

Re: Clerks Taking Questions

Post by Nony » Sun Jul 07, 2019 3:30 pm

I really think the course thing is extremely idiosyncratic and tough to predict. I don't think judicial externships/appellate standards of review courses are in themselves a plus; the plus in the latter case was taking the course from the SSC chief justice's clerk, not the topic of the course. I think it just varies a lot from judge to judge, some care and some don't, so there's only so much effort you should put in to worrying about it. Especially if you're interviewing during your 2L year, when what you take 3L is entirely hypothetical anyway.

And I also think intense discussion about courses depends a lot on what else the candidate has to talk about. I got asked very little about specific courses/grades in any interviews I've ever had, I think primarily because I had worked before law school in a job not super common among applicants, so there were lots of other things to talk about. (And TBF if I saw a transcript that was, say, 99% As and then a B I might comment on that as well, but not so much for caring about grades as that it would kind of stick out.)

So personally I think that if you have a reason for taking a particular course/schedule, go with what matters to you. I don't think there's any clear bright line rule for clerkships.

lolwat
Posts: 678
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2018 2:06 am

Re: Clerks Taking Questions

Post by lolwat » Mon Jul 08, 2019 11:13 am

My experience has been quite the opposite, both in clerkship and in firm interviews. My transcripts including specific classes, and even specific grades have come up... honestly maybe more often than not? Never in a negative way. Frequently this will happen with alums discussing a professor we had in common. I’ve also been asked favorite/least favorite class multiple times. “How did you go about selecting classes” probably 3-5 times?

Two different times an interviewer mentioned and dismissed particular less impressive grades (e.g. “oh I bet you were ticked at [professor giving B+] for ruining a near-perfect year”). I assume these were behavioral questions or legitimately unplanned.

FWIW I am not HLS, but around 10% at one of MVDP. Maybe that makes a difference, but these were across wide ranging interviews. A friend in a similar position was once grilled by a judge for not having a particular class on her schedule, well-known to be a clerking transcript checklist (to be fair, I didn’t take this and was never asked).

So more specifically: I am fairly sure I got my clerkship (2/9/DC COA) in large part due to a strong “challenging” transcript, because the judge basically said as much. It matches up with his rep (hard work! ambitious!) and I think was a tipping point for a position that was a bit of a reach for me.

I also think admin will probably be useful. And also: you may want to think about rearranging simply for the sake your 3L self... you will care a lot less!
Definitely thanks for providing some counter experience here! I will say it sounds like at least part of your experience has to do with mutual knowledge of particular professors or somewhat general comments about your transcript. I don't know if you were a k-jd like me, but I think those types of questions actually come up more often with k-jd's because we have less to talk about than someone like Nony who worked before law school. The favorite/least favorite class question did come up with me quite a bit, but I didn't see that as asking about particular questions about what courses I'm taking in a way that suggests that I would get dinged if I weren't taking like Fed Courts.

Just a gut feeling, also, but part of HLS course selection for clerkships may be the professor rather than the rigor of the topic taught. Some of those professors at the top schools can get you clerkship interviews just by calling judges they know.

I will say one other thing though that I think Dissent already mentioned: Too many rigorous classes can affect your grades, and I'd much suggest you take some seminars or "fluff" class to balance things out in any given semester.

User avatar
CS1775
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2018 5:17 am

Re: Clerks Taking Questions

Post by CS1775 » Tue Jul 09, 2019 5:57 am

Here's a simple question with a very complex answer: what do you not say in clerkship interviews? I'm not talking about egregiously bad stuff, but stuff that the judge doesn't want to hear but the candidate doesn't realize isn't the "right" answer?

Also, aye or nay on writing out intended talking points before the interview?

User avatar
RoyalHollow
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2018 4:52 pm

Re: Clerks Taking Questions

Post by RoyalHollow » Tue Jul 09, 2019 9:34 am

To the above Q about class choices:
We ask a version of the "favorite/least favorite class" question, but it is mostly just to see what you say. A lot of people just go with their best and worst grade, and don't have much to say beyond that. Others talk about the substance of a course that they were surprisingly very interested in, or the opposite. The question is mostly an ice breaker for us, because you can't learn a ton about the person from their answer, but it helps them calm down and be less nervous (all easy questions serve this function). Occasionally someone has a very insightful and well-thought-out answer that actually becomes a plus point, but it is rare that someone answers this so poorly that it counts against them.
Also, we don't care too much about class choice, unless it's obvious that you took all mickey mouse classes after 1L just to keep your GPA high.

User avatar
RoyalHollow
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2018 4:52 pm

Re: Clerks Taking Questions

Post by RoyalHollow » Tue Jul 09, 2019 9:38 am

CS1775 wrote:
Tue Jul 09, 2019 5:57 am
Here's a simple question with a very complex answer: what do you not say in clerkship interviews? I'm not talking about egregiously bad stuff, but stuff that the judge doesn't want to hear but the candidate doesn't realize isn't the "right" answer?

Also, aye or nay on writing out intended talking points before the interview?

I think it is a bad idea to present yourself as someone who *needs to* work collaboratively in order to succeed. Some chambers are collaborative, some are not at all. But all of them will involve some amount of having to work entirely on your own. If you make it sound like you need someone else in the room all the time, that will be a negative for you. There are specific judges for whom this might not matter at all, but my advice is for the average judge. Also, implying in any way that you will only want to work a 9-5 job. Even for judges who maintain very relaxed office hours, it will be a major negative for you if they think you won't be willing to stay late when it's necessary.

Writing out your answer can be good practice, but do your best to not sound like you're reading it when you are in the room. A few applicants were very obviously reciting an answer to us. That they were reciting it wasn't really a problem, because it showed they prepared well and thought of a very good answer to a predictable question. But it didn't show much of their personality, which is a huge part of the interview's purpose.

9C anon

Re: Clerks Taking Questions

Post by 9C anon » Tue Jul 09, 2019 10:45 am

On class selection:
(a) Agree with nony that this is idiosyncratic and will depend on the particular chambers. For my prior chambers (2/7/9, a few years back), we would care if you didn't take admin, fed courts, and conlaw (for schools where it's not a required 1L class). Just having minimal background in those areas is somewhat of a prerequisite for getting up to speed quickly in administrative agency appeals -- like, can you spot Chenery problems without anyone bringing them up? Do you have a basic understanding of deference doctrines? And they are some of the only consistently-difficult 2L/3L classes such that performing well in them gives some indication of your motor and ability that can be otherwise hard to glean when picking between a bunch of otherwise stellar transcripts. We also just know that the judge cares about them, which is 100% more important than whether the clerks care about them. Otherwise, I think you only really run into problems when a clerk (or the judge) went to your school and can actually figure out, like, "are the best grades in hard classes or easy classes." I couldn't tell you that for, like, Michigan, though maybe I could guess if there are some really dumb-sounding seminars. I could tell you that for my school, which has some obvious ways to really inflate your GPA if you're going for it. I tend to think that that is only something that might get someone knocked from a "maybe, leaning no" to a firm no, rather than something that will knock you down from yes to not-yes, though, so probably not as important as just having your substantive bases covered.

(b) We would also typically ask about a class or at least an academic interest, and tried to do that even for alumni applicants. I think I disagree with hollow's answer insofar as candidates most frequently gave bad/disqualifying answers to questions asking about substantive areas of interest -- we were surprised how often people were not able to speak about intellectual problems in the law with any real passion or interest. Like, that's what you're going to do all day as a federal appellate clerk. We really cared if you seemed to actually enjoy it.

On wrong answers:
Touched on this in (b), but answers that indicated you weren't passionate or curious about the law were often disqualifying.
Answers that showed poor judgment or disparaged prior legal employers -- came up more often for candidates coming off judicial externships/district court clerkships, or alumni candidates.
I guess both of those fall into "egregiously bad stuff" and you are looking more for "not necessarily always terrible, but wrong answers for the judge." You can probably guess this, but it will depend a lot on the judge. It is a bit hard to go into detail without throwing out a bunch of questions that would be obviously recognizable to anyone who has interviewed with my judge in the last several years, but there were definitely some wrong answers to the standard suite that would not be immediately obvious to the candidate that they were wrong answers -- the one that's immediately coming to memory is a question about the supreme court that would frequently weed out people who were just approaching cases ideologically rather than being grounded in real, difficult analysis. The judge wanted to know you'd analyze in depth and find the right legal answer even if you disagree with it from a policy perspective. But some of the answers that knocked candidates out wouldn't be disqualifying everywhere, and other judges might love answers that were definitely wrong for our chambers.
Agreed 100% with hollow that anything that indicated the candidate was looking for a 9-5 government job -- or hinted that -- was often dooming, though again maybe only in a "confirms a no rather than creates a no" way. Federal appellate clerkships are not as insanely paced as biglaw. But they do get busy, and we needed to know you were down to roll up your sleeves when that happened.

User avatar
RoyalHollow
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2018 4:52 pm

Re: Clerks Taking Questions

Post by RoyalHollow » Tue Jul 09, 2019 3:02 pm

9C anon wrote:
Tue Jul 09, 2019 10:45 am


(b) We would also typically ask about a class or at least an academic interest, and tried to do that even for alumni applicants. I think I disagree with hollow's answer insofar as candidates most frequently gave bad/disqualifying answers to questions asking about substantive areas of interest -- we were surprised how often people were not able to speak about intellectual problems in the law with any real passion or interest. Like, that's what you're going to do all day as a federal appellate clerk. We really cared if you seemed to actually enjoy it.

On wrong answers:
Touched on this in (b), but answers that indicated you weren't passionate or curious about the law were often disqualifying.
We also put a huge premium on intellectual curiosity, but we had a few other questions that we thought got at this point better than the one about favorite class. The best answer to the favorite class question is one that does what 9C Anon is talking about: shows you have curiosity and interest in the law (and not just that your favorite class is Contracts because that was your best grade, end of sentence). My previous answer wasn't clear about this.

9C anon

Re: Clerks Taking Questions

Post by 9C anon » Tue Jul 09, 2019 3:26 pm

Yea, I agree there are better ways to get at it. We typically didn't ask favorite class unless there was nothing else that jumped out (note topic was usually more likely to lead to a good answer, but it depends on the resume and there were often more interesting things). Just wanted to emphasize it because giving flat answers to questions designed to get you speaking passionately and intelligently about something you're interested in was one of the few typical patterns leading to a no.

User avatar
MJB
Posts: 285
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:26 pm

Re: Clerks Taking Questions

Post by MJB » Tue Jul 09, 2019 3:44 pm

Re: writing out talking points, I'd probably bullet point a few things to say about most things on your resume and maybe about questions you'll almost certainly be asked (e.g., why do you want to clerk [for me, at this location, for this type of judge/level of court]?), but I wouldn't do too much beyond that. In addition to sometimes coming off as not very genuine, scripting can make it hard to slot your points in where they fit naturally in the conversation, and it's usually not vital that you hit absolutely everything that you came in prepared to talk about.

I agree with the "what do you not say" answers - the purpose of the interview is usually to judge your personality, and anything that comes off as unenthusiastic or disengaged, whether about the law generally or the clerkship, probably won't serve you well.

lolwat
Posts: 678
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2018 2:06 am

Re: Clerks Taking Questions

Post by lolwat » Tue Jul 09, 2019 9:16 pm

I make talking points for almost anything I need to prepare for--interviews, oral arguments, sometimes even just for a phone call or a meeting if I'm trying to gather and organize thoughts. It helps a ton. For an interview, I would suggest writing out some talking points to prepare, but not as something to look at or even bring to the interview. You're not trying to hit every point or even any particular point at all. You just want to be able to have an intelligible conversation about the topics likely to be asked about.

User avatar
CS1775
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2018 5:17 am

Re: Clerks Taking Questions

Post by CS1775 » Wed Jul 10, 2019 4:59 am

MJB wrote:
Tue Jul 09, 2019 3:44 pm
Re: writing out talking points, I'd probably bullet point a few things to say about most things on your resume and maybe about questions you'll almost certainly be asked (e.g., why do you want to clerk [for me, at this location, for this type of judge/level of court]?), but I wouldn't do too much beyond that. In addition to sometimes coming off as not very genuine, scripting can make it hard to slot your points in where they fit naturally in the conversation, and it's usually not vital that you hit absolutely everything that you came in prepared to talk about.

I agree with the "what do you not say" answers - the purpose of the interview is usually to judge your personality, and anything that comes off as unenthusiastic or disengaged, whether about the law generally or the clerkship, probably won't serve you well.
lolwat wrote:
Tue Jul 09, 2019 9:16 pm
I make talking points for almost anything I need to prepare for--interviews, oral arguments, sometimes even just for a phone call or a meeting if I'm trying to gather and organize thoughts. It helps a ton. For an interview, I would suggest writing out some talking points to prepare, but not as something to look at or even bring to the interview. You're not trying to hit every point or even any particular point at all. You just want to be able to have an intelligible conversation about the topics likely to be asked about.
That's what I'm thinking of doing - writing down a few, short talking points that I want to hit on a notesheet in my padfolio. Review before the interview in the hallway/waiting room. Close the padfolio before going in.

And thanks for the tips from everyone else. I have an interview Thursday and faculty inform me that this judge is mostly a "getting to know you" interviewer, rather than asking about substantive legal questions. Clerking for this judge has been my No. 1 clerkship goal, so I'm very excited yet also very nervous.

lolwat
Posts: 678
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2018 2:06 am

Re: Clerks Taking Questions

Post by lolwat » Wed Jul 10, 2019 1:53 pm

Oh, good luck on the interview!

User avatar
MJB
Posts: 285
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:26 pm

Re: Clerks Taking Questions

Post by MJB » Wed Jul 10, 2019 2:39 pm

lolwat wrote:
Wed Jul 10, 2019 1:53 pm
Oh, good luck on the interview!
+1! Bullet points are a particularly good choice for a "getting to know you" interview, as slotting your points into the conversation naturally tends to be especially important and there are often fewer opportunities to speak at length.

User avatar
CS1775
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2018 5:17 am

Re: Clerks Taking Questions

Post by CS1775 » Thu Jul 11, 2019 2:52 pm

MJB wrote:
Wed Jul 10, 2019 2:39 pm
lolwat wrote:
Wed Jul 10, 2019 1:53 pm
Oh, good luck on the interview!
+1! Bullet points are a particularly good choice for a "getting to know you" interview, as slotting your points into the conversation naturally tends to be especially important and there are often fewer opportunities to speak at length.
Thanks guys! Interview lasted for about an hour. Got a good vibe. Spoke with both the judge and his permanent clerk 1-on-1 (judge first, then he handed me over to his clerk). Writing out talking points helped because I was able to take talking points and transition easier from topic to topic.

User avatar
MJB
Posts: 285
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:26 pm

Re: Clerks Taking Questions

Post by MJB » Thu Jul 11, 2019 4:55 pm

CS1775 wrote:
Thu Jul 11, 2019 2:52 pm
MJB wrote:
Wed Jul 10, 2019 2:39 pm
lolwat wrote:
Wed Jul 10, 2019 1:53 pm
Oh, good luck on the interview!
+1! Bullet points are a particularly good choice for a "getting to know you" interview, as slotting your points into the conversation naturally tends to be especially important and there are often fewer opportunities to speak at length.
Thanks guys! Interview lasted for about an hour. Got a good vibe. Spoke with both the judge and his permanent clerk 1-on-1 (judge first, then he handed me over to his clerk). Writing out talking points helped because I was able to take talking points and transition easier from topic to topic.
Excellent - I'm pulling for you!

lolwat
Posts: 678
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2018 2:06 am

Re: Clerks Taking Questions

Post by lolwat » Thu Jul 11, 2019 5:49 pm

MJB wrote:
Thu Jul 11, 2019 4:55 pm
CS1775 wrote:
Thu Jul 11, 2019 2:52 pm
MJB wrote:
Wed Jul 10, 2019 2:39 pm
lolwat wrote:
Wed Jul 10, 2019 1:53 pm
Oh, good luck on the interview!
+1! Bullet points are a particularly good choice for a "getting to know you" interview, as slotting your points into the conversation naturally tends to be especially important and there are often fewer opportunities to speak at length.
Thanks guys! Interview lasted for about an hour. Got a good vibe. Spoke with both the judge and his permanent clerk 1-on-1 (judge first, then he handed me over to his clerk). Writing out talking points helped because I was able to take talking points and transition easier from topic to topic.
Excellent - I'm pulling for you!

Same! :)

User avatar
CS1775
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2018 5:17 am

Re: Clerks Taking Questions

Post by CS1775 » Wed Jul 31, 2019 8:46 pm

Still waiting to hear back from my interview. No one from my law school has heard back either (this is a SSC clerkship in my law school's state). While I wait, I am sending out more applications.

Does it reflect poorly on me if I send a scanned copy of my official transcript in a digital application? The scanned original was taken out of an envelope and has fold lines.

lolwat
Posts: 678
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2018 2:06 am

Re: Clerks Taking Questions

Post by lolwat » Thu Aug 01, 2019 11:54 am

I hope you get it, man. Knowing practically nothing, if I had to guess, it would be that the judge probably schedules interviews throughout a few weeks and likes to finish all of them before making any decisions.

As for the transcript question, I'm not sure I ever used an official law school transcript anywhere at all. I used a separate "grade sheet" document that was essentially an unofficial transcript from my school formatted in a way that looked nice but had all of the information on it, and just called it an unofficial transcript whenever I applied to places. But when I applied to places through OSCAR that wanted undergraduate transcripts, I used a scanned copy of my official transcript. I have no idea if it reflects poorly or not because it has never been brought up. I certainly wouldn't think much about it as someone that reviewed clerkship applications (and reviews firm applications).

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest