Reading your post, two things come to mind. First, back in the day, teachers were respected and parents did not complain every time their child got a bad report or had to be disciplined. If there is nothing more to his complaints than what you have discussed, it seems like he has led a pretty pampered life and is in for a very big surprise when he enters the real world. Second, transparency is the great bugaboo of hierarchical entities, and the judiciary is no different. No matter how wrong this gentleman is, the judges are far wronger.
Great post! I agree that this is a topic that merits much more discussion and transparency. Interestingly enough, I actually know of a former ex-O'Scannlain clerk who had a very negative and unpleasant experience, so I think it is truly a matter of different strokes for different folks. My impression is also that many judges evolve over the years in terms of work style and ideology, and that this accounts for the striking incongruity in experiences between some clerks.
One factor that can definitely play a role in the quality of clerkship experiences—but is hard to figure out in advance—is how clerks get along with each other.
My class of clerks got along incredibly well, and we remain very close friends to this day. But I don't think that can be said for all clerk classes—and sometimes tension or conflict between clerks can have a very negative effect on a clerkship experience (and the judge might not even know about it).
For most law school graduates who clerk this win be only their second introduction to full-time employment after the summer of wine and roses as a summer pet. They have not yet discovered that the experience of a first-year associate is altogether a different matter. Whether they go to a firm first or a clerkship they are totally unprepared for the socialization process. They will discover that more senior attorneys supervising their work have unstated assumptions. No junior attorney needs detailed instructions, junior attorneys are devoid of any faculty for mature legal judgment, they insufficiently think through a problem before beginning to write, they won’t network among their near peers when they get stuck, they don’t understand that the term draft means a perfectly edited and proofed final copy that should be treated as good to go, and their pervasive anxiety about the quality of their work can lead them to presenting as over-confident. If you can’t dazzle with brilliance baffle them with bullshit. Anyway, that was me as a first year and I received a lot of dressing down before I internalized the culture.
Great post. I was fortunate to have a great year clerking for the late Judge Frank Van Antwerpen. My experience in applying for clerkships many decades ago was interesting. I interviewed with a Third Circuit judge who finished the interview by letting me talk to her current clerks alone. They warned me to run away run away! I then spent months trying to figure out what to do if she offered me the job. ( This was the first year that judges agreed to hold off on offers until a specified time and date. If your phone rang you answered it and took the first job offered, unless you had incredible nerve.)
Chief Judge Livingston knowingly misrepresents fact and law to help protect other judges. She personally helped conceal evidence that a judge lied about the content of a document that the judge received ex parte and reviewed in camera. When I addressed (in court filings) that Judge Livingston, herself, lied and Judge Livingston, herself, knowingly violated federal law, the Second Circuit commenced proceedings to disbar me.
Second Circuit judges ordered me to show cause why I should not be disbarred for saying (and showing) in court filings that Judge Livingston and other judges lied and committed federal offenses. Those proceedings have been hanging over my head for years. No one ever has even contended that anything I wrote about any judge (lying, knowingly violating federal law, and committing federal offenses) was false. Yet, the Second Circuit continues to refrain from granting me the hearing I've requested repeatedly or disposing of the disbarment proceedings. And multiple Second Circuit judges continue to help conceal the evidence that a judge lied about the content of the evidence that he reviewed in camera.
Reading your post, two things come to mind. First, back in the day, teachers were respected and parents did not complain every time their child got a bad report or had to be disciplined. If there is nothing more to his complaints than what you have discussed, it seems like he has led a pretty pampered life and is in for a very big surprise when he enters the real world. Second, transparency is the great bugaboo of hierarchical entities, and the judiciary is no different. No matter how wrong this gentleman is, the judges are far wronger.
Great post! I agree that this is a topic that merits much more discussion and transparency. Interestingly enough, I actually know of a former ex-O'Scannlain clerk who had a very negative and unpleasant experience, so I think it is truly a matter of different strokes for different folks. My impression is also that many judges evolve over the years in terms of work style and ideology, and that this accounts for the striking incongruity in experiences between some clerks.
One factor that can definitely play a role in the quality of clerkship experiences—but is hard to figure out in advance—is how clerks get along with each other.
My class of clerks got along incredibly well, and we remain very close friends to this day. But I don't think that can be said for all clerk classes—and sometimes tension or conflict between clerks can have a very negative effect on a clerkship experience (and the judge might not even know about it).
For most law school graduates who clerk this win be only their second introduction to full-time employment after the summer of wine and roses as a summer pet. They have not yet discovered that the experience of a first-year associate is altogether a different matter. Whether they go to a firm first or a clerkship they are totally unprepared for the socialization process. They will discover that more senior attorneys supervising their work have unstated assumptions. No junior attorney needs detailed instructions, junior attorneys are devoid of any faculty for mature legal judgment, they insufficiently think through a problem before beginning to write, they won’t network among their near peers when they get stuck, they don’t understand that the term draft means a perfectly edited and proofed final copy that should be treated as good to go, and their pervasive anxiety about the quality of their work can lead them to presenting as over-confident. If you can’t dazzle with brilliance baffle them with bullshit. Anyway, that was me as a first year and I received a lot of dressing down before I internalized the culture.
I live in NH, I want to know what jar of grape jam was so exceptional that it was specifically requested
Great post. I was fortunate to have a great year clerking for the late Judge Frank Van Antwerpen. My experience in applying for clerkships many decades ago was interesting. I interviewed with a Third Circuit judge who finished the interview by letting me talk to her current clerks alone. They warned me to run away run away! I then spent months trying to figure out what to do if she offered me the job. ( This was the first year that judges agreed to hold off on offers until a specified time and date. If your phone rang you answered it and took the first job offered, unless you had incredible nerve.)
I think I might know the judge you interviewed with—who was a legendarily tough boss....
While reading this, I kept thinking that there needs to be a Law Clerk version of Glassdoor. Hopefully that's what LAP's Clerkship Database is.
Chief Judge Livingston knowingly misrepresents fact and law to help protect other judges. She personally helped conceal evidence that a judge lied about the content of a document that the judge received ex parte and reviewed in camera. When I addressed (in court filings) that Judge Livingston, herself, lied and Judge Livingston, herself, knowingly violated federal law, the Second Circuit commenced proceedings to disbar me.
Second Circuit judges ordered me to show cause why I should not be disbarred for saying (and showing) in court filings that Judge Livingston and other judges lied and committed federal offenses. Those proceedings have been hanging over my head for years. No one ever has even contended that anything I wrote about any judge (lying, knowingly violating federal law, and committing federal offenses) was false. Yet, the Second Circuit continues to refrain from granting me the hearing I've requested repeatedly or disposing of the disbarment proceedings. And multiple Second Circuit judges continue to help conceal the evidence that a judge lied about the content of the evidence that he reviewed in camera.