Advertisement

May 23, 2013

Law Clerk's Overtime Exemption Depends on Duties Performed

A law school graduate working in a law firm before becoming licensed to practice law is an exempt professional under the California analogue of the FLSA professional exemption, a California court of appeal ruled on Wednesday. This decision is instructive because the court did not conclude that law clerks are categorically exempt or non-exempt from overtime, but rather looked to the duties the law clerk performed.

The clerk performed tasks customarily performed by junior attorneys. Although he was supervised by a licensed attorney and did not sign his name to pleadings, he drafted pleadings and discovery demands and responses, did legal research and drafted memoranda of points and authorities and supporting declarations, interviewed witnesses, assisted in deposition preparation and interacted with opposing counsel concerning discovery issues. The court found that these responsibilities required sufficient exercise of discretion and judgment to satisfy the exemption (the relevant portion of which is almost identical to the FLSA). In contrast, some law clerks perform work that is more clerical, administrative or routine in nature. Based on the court’s reasoning, these law clerks may not qualify for the exemption.

©2013 Greenberg Traurig, LLP. All rights reserved.

About the Author

Associate

Jay P. Lechner is a board certified labor and employment lawyer, specializing in the defense of discrimination, whistleblower, harassment, and wage and hour cases, as well as restrictive covenants, retaliation, related state tort and contract issues, and other types of employment litigation.

813-318-5700

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.