Messing with Texas

No more recruiting bonuses? The true story of a young lawyer's fight to take perks from Lone Star clerks.

Who's the agitator stirring up a scandal over clerk recruiting bonuses in Texas? He's Austin lawyer Cris Feldman-a.k.a. court-clerk Public Enemy Number One. Feldman, a staffer with the watchdog group Texans for Public Justice, doesn't think local Supreme Court clerks ought to take signing bonuses and other perks from the big local law firms that recruit them. Especially since those firms often have litigation before the court. His aim: to stamp out recruiting bonuses.

Since last fall, Feldman has been gathering data on the so-called clerk perks-which include recruiting bonuses of up to $35,000, along with extra payments for moving expenses and bar fees. Many firms either pay out or promise such perks while their future employees are still clerking. And that, according to Feldman, can create huge conflicts of interest.

In a new report, Texans for Public Justice (which tracks special-interest money in state courts) claims that seventy-six court clerks faced 402 potential conflicts between 1992 and 2000 because of matters their future law firms had pending before the court.

"It's unfortunate that clerks are caught up in this scandal," says Feldman, a 1999 University of Texas law grad. "But it's a basic good-government issue."

One Texas prosecutor, Travis County attorney Ken Oden, has claimed that the recruiting bonuses may even violate state antibribery laws. And one high-profile law firm, Houston-based Vinson & Elkins, has temporarily suspended clerk bonuses while the matter gets sorted out.

The Texas Supreme Court's take on all the fuss? "It's a bunch of hooey," says Justice Jim Baker, who's in charge of the court's clerk program.

Court policy, says Baker, already requires clerks to recuse themselves from cases brought by a future employer. The court also recently adopted new guidelines (modeled after federal court rules) that bar clerks from accepting bonuses while they're employed at the court.

The controversy has already had a chilling effect, according to court executive assistant Bill Willis. As of January the court had just thirty applicants for eighteen 2002 clerkships-down from more than 130 for the same period in 1996. The steep rise in law-firm pay is the chief reason for that decline, but Willis thinks the prospect of "being called crooks so early in their careers" is also scaring off recruits.

Feldman isn't apologizing. Other states, including New York, Arizona and Delaware, have stricter rules to guard against conflicts, he says. In his view, Texas ought to follow suit. And if that means Texas clerks, who earn just $37,900 a year, lose out on some extra cash? "That's what public service means," says Feldman. "You work for less to serve the public."