Home | About | RSS Feed | Contact and Publicity Guidelines | Comment Policy the Law, the Universe, and Everything 

advertise-here4


Slip Opinions


A digital-age bird man for Alcatraz?  Tweeting oneself to jail. (DJS)

NYT: How privacy vanishes online (DJS)

Orin Kerr critiques the 11th Circuit on email and the Fourth Amendment (DJS)

Identification by your germs (DJS)

Interview of Professor William Stuntz (DJS)

Professor Eric Goldman on the proposed federal Anti-SLAPP Bill (DJS)

Important advice for new profs: DO NOT make jokes (online or otherwise) about killing your students. (kw)

FTC Report: ID theft is down but overall fraud is up (DJS)

Balkin on reconciliation vs. filibuster (DJS)

Schneier: Security cameras don't reduce crime (DJS)

Our Podcast

Subscribe to Law Talk

law-rev-contents2.jpg


  • Posts by Author

  • Categories

  • Archives


  • Recent Comments

    • ParanoidProf on Spring 2010: Is the Window Open? (re-re-bumped)

    • Miriam A. Cherry on Milgram on T.V.

    • Kimball Robinson on Snyder v. Phelps: Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress and the First Amendment

    • unpublished on Spring 2010: Is the Window Open? (re-re-bumped)

    • bimme on Googling Employees: Why Your Online Reputation Matters

    • Diell on Should We Have Professional Juries?

    • new anon on Spring 2010: Is the Window Open? (re-re-bumped)

    • Aspirant on Spring 2010: Is the Window Open? (re-re-bumped)

    • Anonymous Above on Spring 2010: Is the Window Open? (re-re-bumped)

    • InquiringMind on Spring 2010: Is the Window Open? (re-re-bumped)

    • Aspirant on Spring 2010: Is the Window Open? (re-re-bumped)

    • dude on Googling Employees: Why Your Online Reputation Matters

    • Jr Deputy Accountant on You, Lehman’s Re-Po Magic, and Ernst & Young

    • ParanoidProf on Spring 2010: Is the Window Open? (re-re-bumped)

    • Ken on Snyder v. Phelps: Funeral Picketing, the First Amendment, and the Intrusion Upon Seclusion Tort

  •  

    Site Meter

In the bleak midwinter . . .

posted by Mark Edwards

A little inside baseball discussion for the professoriate: it seems that law review submission time is upon us. 

My current submission strategy

My current submission strategy

Many of us are trying to put the finishing touches on articles during the winter teaching break. And, according to ExpressO, a number of highly-regarded reviews that have been closed to submissions are opening themselves again in the very near future.  Therefore, I think it’s safe to say a tsunami of footnotes is bearing down upon many law review offices.

For the relatively new, untenured among us – oh say, for instance, me – this is an especially important moment, and it’s important to get it right.  The pressure can make us a little loopy.  Last week I sat listening to the lovely Christmas carol In the Bleak Midwinter, and when it got to the verse, “What have I to offer, poor as I am?” the image that flashed in my mind was me, face smudged with dirt, sending out a crinkled copy of my current draft article.

Me, immediately following article submission

Me, immediately following article submission

A wonderful professor of mine – then untenured, now safely ensconced in the tenured embrace of the Ivy league – once dressed for Halloween as ‘Notenuratu,’ a vampire-like creature whose cape was covered with pages of his draft articles. 

But how, exactly, does one get the submission process right?  It’s a question that I suspect takes up a lot of chat time among us junior scholars.   Do you have a submission strategy?  Want to share it?  Pretty please?


 January 4, 2010 at 12:30 pm   Posted in: Uncategorized   Print This Post Print This Post

Responses (7)

  1. 3L - January 4, 2010 at 3:01 pm

    As an Exec Articles editor, I caution against submitting too early for the spring cycle because most editorial boards are brand new and don’t know what they’re doing yet. Let them cut their teeth on other articles.

  2. Unsure - January 4, 2010 at 3:28 pm

    This whole “submission cycle” business, I’m told, is overrated. If a law review wants an article you write, my senior sources tell me, they’ll take it regardless of whether it is “in season” or not. So submit whenever you’re ready. Is this right? Or is timing part of the scholarly process too?

  3. The Dude - January 4, 2010 at 10:21 pm

    As a current EIC, I would caution against completely ignoring the submission cycle. A top-tier journal that publishes 5+ issues an academic year might take your article “regardless of whether it is “in season.” However, lower-tier journals, that publisher fewer issues, often “fill-up” rapidly toward the middle or end of a submission cycle, and are unable to make publication offers. Even if they want your article, they are unable to make an offer because that decision is normally reserved for next year’s editorial board. Some journals simply stop checking their expresso account at that point (or deleting submissions), and these submissions never even make it to the next year’s board.

    Why do they fill up when good submissions might come along at a later date? Lower-tiered journals struggle to attract good article. Often, when they make an offer, the author uses that offer to parlay it into one from a higher-tiered journal. As a result, lower-tiered journals are worried they won’t be able to fill their volume will quality article. After all, if a good submission comes along later, a better journal will probably take it–that’s the assumption at least. The result: low quality articles get snapped up by over-offering non top-tier journals, which then stop monitoring submissions.

    In sum, unless you’re certain you’ll attract an offer from a tier 1 journal, you should strongly consider submitting during the submission cycle. It would be nice if there was a national EIC election day, but there’s not. I expect that many of the new EIC’s (who then install their editorial boards) are elected by the end of February. This might be the best time to submit.

  4. Jeff Lipshaw - January 5, 2010 at 4:12 am

    Ah, but the rejection season knows no bounds. In the spirit of the season, a rejection from a “top 20″ review came down my chimney on December 23 for a piece I submitted in the “fall” submission season. (It’s in final edits in another journal.)

    It kind of reminded me of the most vitriolic “you aren’t complying with our discovery requests” letter I ever saw. After spending about a page and a half accusing the other lawyer of every offense known to humanity, God, and the FRCP, the letter, also dated something like December 23, closed with a perky “Best wishes for the holiday season.”

  5. krs - January 5, 2010 at 2:25 pm

    Was a law review rejection letter full of vitriol, or did the closing just seem out of place?

    Civil discovery is 90% of the reason why lawyers are rightfully hated.

  6. Jeff Lipshaw - January 5, 2010 at 4:54 pm

    No, it wasn’t vitriolic at all. Just weirdly late, and like a Xmas gift.

  7. 3L - January 10, 2010 at 4:28 pm

    Think of what a great Xmas gift it would have been for the students, had they spent time reviewing your piece (which you didn’t withdraw upon accepting an offer at another journal) only to find, after extending an offer, that their time was wasted!

Leave a Reply

*
To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture. Click on the picture to hear an audio file of the word.
Click to hear an audio file of the anti-spam word


  • « Previous post
  • Next post »

Authors

Daniel J. Solove
Kaimipono Wenger
Dave Hoffman
Nate Oman
Frank Pasquale
Deven Desai
Danielle Citron
Lawrence Cunningham
Sarah Waldeck
Jaya Ramji-Nogales
Solangel Maldonado
Gerard Magliocca

Guests

Robert Ahdieh
Lisa Fairfax
Michelle Harner
Sherrilyn Ifill
Angela Onwuachi-Willing
Tuan Samahon
Alfred Yen










Previous Guests

Michael Abramowicz
Michelle Adams
Robert Ahdieh
Michelle Anderson
Laura Appleman
Ann Bartow
Adam Benforado
Francesca Bignami
Jeremy Blumenthal
Kathleen Boozang
Bruce Boyden
Donald Braman
Al Brophy
Neil H. Buchanan
Bill Burke-White
Scott Burris
Paul Butler
Naomi Cahn
Anupam Chander
Miriam Cherry
Jack Chin
Jennifer Collins
Thomas Crocker
Allison Danner
Brannon Denning
Deven Desai
Mike Dimino
Mark Edwards
David Fagundes
Christine Haight Farley
Kim Ferzan
Dan Filler
Michael Froomkin
Amanda Frost
Timothy Glynn
Rachel Godsil
Eric Goldman
David Gray
Craig Green
Tristin Green
Jeffrey Harrison
Erica Hashimoto
Carissa Hessick
Laura Heymann
Robert Hillman
Christine Hurt
Darian Ibrahim
John Ip
Kevin Johnson
Kristin Johnson
Dan Kahan
Jeffrey Kahn
Brian Kalt
Sam Kamin
Michael Kang
Chimène Keitner
Orin Kerr
Nancy Kim
Heidi Kitrosser
Adam Kolber
Russell Korobkin
Alex Kreit
Anita S. Krishnakumar
Susan Kuo
Greg Lastowka
Sarah Lawsky
Erik Lillquist
Jeff Lipshaw
Jonathan Lipson
Jacqueline Lipton
Joseph Liu
Michael Madison
Solangel Maldonado
Jason Mazzone
Linda McClain
William McGeveran
Salil Mehra
Carrie Menkel-Meadow
Max Minzner
Viva Moffat
Scott Moss
Eric Muller
Jaya Ramji-Nogales
Helen Norton
Elizabeth Nowicki
Paul Ohm
Michael O'Shea
David Opderback
Kristen Osenga
Rafael Pardo
Marcy Peek
Eduardo Peñalver
Robert Percival
David Post
Shruti Rana
Geoffrey Rapp
Neil Richards
Lori Ringhand
Alice Ristroph
Susan Scafidi
Paul Secunda
Jonathan Siegel
Jessica Silbey
Peter Smith
Adam Steinman
Charles Sullivan
Rick Swedloff
Steph Tai
Andrew Taslitz
Robert Tsai
Jenia Turner
Steve Vladeck
Spencer Weber Waller
Howard Wasserman
Melissa Waters
Frank Wu
Alfred Yen
Corey Yung
David Zaring
Timothy Zick
Michael Zimmer
Jonathan Zittrain

Ownership

Concurring Opinions is a
general-interest legal blog
operated by Concurring
Opinions LLC, a Pennsylvania
Limited Liability Corporation.

Blogroll

Above the Law
ACS Blog
Althouse
Balkinization
Becker-Posner Blog
BlackProf
BoingBoing
Chicago Law Faculty Blog
Conglomerate
CrimLaw
Crime & Federalism
CrimProf Blog
Crooked Timber
Discourse.net
Dorf on Law
Election Law
Emergent Chaos
The Faculty Lounge
Feminist Law Profs
43(B)log
Freakonomics Blog
Freedom to Tinker
Google Blogoscoped
How Appealing
Ideoblog
Info/Law
Instapundit.com
Juris Novus
Jurisdynamics
Law and Humanities Blog
Law and Letters
Law Librarian Blog
Legal Profession Blog
Legal Theory Blog
Legal Times Blog
Leiter Reports
Brian Leiter's Law School Reports
Lessig Blog
Madisonian Theory
Media Law Blog
Mirror of Justice
The Moderate Voice
National Security Advisors
Opinio Juris
Point of Law
PrawfsBlawg
ProfessorBainbridge.com
Property Prof Blog
Red Tape Chronicles
The Right Coast
Schneier on Security
SCOTUSBlog
Security Dilemmas
Sentencing Law and Policy
Simple Justice
Sivacracy.net
The Situationist
Susan Crawford
TalkLeft
Talking Points Memo
TaxProf Blog
Tech & Marketing Law
Truth on the Market
Volokh Conspiracy
WorkPlace Prof Blog
WSJ Law Blog
Wonkette
The Yin Blog


© Concurring Opinions

Powered by WordPress