Any Advice?! UC Hastings v. Loyola v. Pepperdine Forum

[mirage1287]

I recently got accepted into UC Hastings, Loyola Law and Pepperdine (and am also waiting to hear back from Fordham U). I'm having trouble deciding between the 3 California schools though...I know Hastings is ranked slightly higher than the other 2 schools, however I've gotten $84,000 from Loyola over 3 years and $75,000 from Pepperdine (both with the requirement to stay in the top-third of the class to keep the scholarships). I've also been looking a lot at entertainment law, which Loyola and Pepperdine both have programs for. Anyone have any advice? What would you do?

[Borhas]

hmmmm if you have no qualms about living in LA, I'd say go take the money at Loyola... despite the GPA req. If you want to do public interest I'd say Hastings. If you like a more conservative bent in education I'd say pepperdine (but I tend to think Loyola is a bit more respected in CA).

$0.02 from a dumb 0L

[quickquestionthanks]

Hastings vs. LA is another debate, but between the two LA schools, I would go to Pepperdine.

Loyola is in a concrete jungle, and the facilities match the surroundings. While centrally located in terms of the LA metro area, it is still several miles from a pleasant part of town (Los Feliz/Silverlake).

Pepperdine was built so that the Pacific Ocean is visible from essentially every spot on campus. It is amazing, as is the architecture.

Neither make you a lock to get a great job in LA, so you'll have to work pretty hard and network well, but at least you can do so while having something pleasant to look at.

[amacqueen]

What was your LSAT GPA (if you do not mind me asking)? I got into Loyola but was offered NO money and was kind of suprised.

[Great Satchmo]

What I understand about entertainment law is that it's a HUGE connections game - can you go out into LA and make the in-roads that are necessary?

If you want to try to get into that industry, it would seem that being nearby is going to be important. I'd say go with Loyola, but see if you can leverage the Pepperdine/Loyola scholarships against one another and see if there is more money or a lower stipulation in it.

[rx3r]

What I understand about entertainment law is that it's a HUGE connections game - can you go out into LA and make the in-roads that are necessary?

If you want to try to get into that industry, it would seem that being nearby is going to be important. I'd say go with Loyola, but see if you can leverage the Pepperdine/Loyola scholarships against one another and see if there is more money or a lower stipulation in it.

+1. My lowly 0L opinion is that if you want entertainment, you need to be in LA for schmoozing purposes.

[rx3r]

To elaborate further, LA affords you more opportunities like:

http://www.aimp.org/event/2010/05/20/25 ... odd_Brabec

There is a student price. You need to go to these things to meet entertainment lawyers and make connections.

[MJMD]

Out of all the people I have ever heard of who either got jobs in entertainment law, or went from law school to some other job in the entertainment industry in L.A., such as working for an agency, the great majority went to Pepperdine. I'm writing this from Canada. We have a big film industry in B.C. (where the low Canadian dollar and government tax incentives have essentially been employed to rob California blind), and whenever a lawyer from L.A. comes up to talk to a class at UBC, or any other Canadian law school, about entertainment law or working in Hollywood, that lawyer is invariably from Pepperdine. So the school's reputation has carried that far.

Consider also Pepperdine's reputation as a "conservative" law school. The fact that it has acquired this reputation means that, aside from its strength in the entertainment sector (where many key players are surprisingly conservative individuals in private), it has produced many notable public interest figures (e.g. Kenneth Starr, James Hahn, Rod Blagojevich, etc.). More importantly, these prominent figures all share common interests and a similar cast of mind, otherwise the school as a whole would not be known for a particular ideological character. With these common interests, they have continued to network together. The school would not be regarded as particularly "conservative" if it did not have a notable network of alumni. In the long run, I think that this strong alumni network will take you further in L.A. than simply going to law school there ever could. Schmoozing in L.A. is something to do during the summer, when working there, not while attending classes during the school year. Given this assessment, the relative ranking of the two schools, the near-parity of the scholarships, and the comparatively beautiful setting of Pepperdine, I would definitely choose Pepperdine.

[jarofsoup]

Hastings does very well in California. I have met a ton of Hastings lawyers in Cal.

[Great Satchmo]

Hastings does very well in California. I have met a ton of Hastings lawyers in Cal.

Hastings does do very well in the Bay Area, and I can only assume fairly well in the rest of CA. However, the also graduate classes of over 400 students each year, so that helps with meeting a lot of grads (not to mention you generally stay in CA after Hastings).

[quickquestionthanks]

P.S: oh, Pepperdine is in L.A. Well, then, definitely Pepperdine.

Many would (rightfully) argue whether Malibu is technically LA.

[Danteshek]

.

[MJMD]

Ok, well, maybe I don't know what I'm talking about, but that's why I gave my entire rationale, so that the OP can take it for what its worth: if you can completely refute what I'm saying, then do so in a way that provides the OP with useful information.

P.S: I was also unaware of Loyola's entertainment law journal or the funky Frank Gehry campus, both of which, in retrospect, justifiably give it some of its edge back against Pepperdine.

[Danteshek]

I have written extensively about this in the Southwestern thread, if the OP is interested. Bottom line is 1) Southwestern has by far the most extensive curriculum of any law school in entertainment law and 2) you can take copyright as a 1L at Southwestern with Professor Lind - a professor who is among the most respected in the country for Copyright, and who has litigated many of the cases in the textbook. Southwestern is also the home of the ABA Entertainment law journal, so students can work as student editors.

Loyola is also strong in entertainment law. They have a full blown student run entertainment law journal. They also have a similar (but not quite as extensive) entertainment curriculum as Southwestern.

Students from both schools have access to similar externship opportunities with Studios, Agencies etc...

[General Tso]

1. It is better for comparison to tell us what your expected debt levels at each school will be, assuming you are able to keep the scholarship.

2. We need to know what your career goals are. If you are looking for private practice, you will most likely not get biglaw out of any of these schools so you may want to look at the cheaper options. If you are thinking of PI, Hastings has a great PI program and PICAP + IBR to handle loan repayment.

3. Regional preferences, if any. Hastings can place throughout CA, whereas the other 2 place mostly in SoCal. If the Bay Area is your target region then the choice may be easier.

I am of the opinion that Hastings is not worth too much more than 100k debt if you are looking for private practice, because the private firm job market is just totally obliterated right now. So even with good grades there is the risk of a 60k job + Bay Area COL + student loans.

FWIW I chose Hastings over similar scholarships at USD and Loyola. The main reason was the GPA req....I was really worried that I might lose the scholarship and STILL have mass debt + worse career options than if I went to Hastings. Because I am only looking at around 75k debt at Hastings (due to personal savings + parent support), I figured Hastings was okay.

But if I had things to do over again, I think I might have chosen USD w/ around 80k and top 1/3 req.

[General Tso]

I have written extensively about this in the Southwestern thread, if the OP is interested. Bottom line is 1) Southwestern has by far the most extensive curriculum of any law school in entertainment law and 2) you can take copyright as a 1L at Southwestern with Professor Lind - a professor who is among the most respected in the country for Copyright, and who has litigated many of the cases in the textbook. Southwestern is also the home of the ABA Entertainment law journal, so students can work as student editors.

Loyola is also strong in entertainment law. They have a full blown student run entertainment law journal. They also have a similar (but not quite as extensive) entertainment curriculum as Southwestern.

Students from both schools have access to similar externship opportunities with Studios, Agencies etc...

while Danteshek is well-intentioned, I think this talk of schools being "strong" in entertainment law is a bit overblown. That is true for any specialty really. Many Hastings students find work at places like Disney and Universal as well, and there are probably only 1 or 2 courses in Entertainment law offered up here.

I think it is better to pursue a well-rounded legal curriculum that will give you broad career options. For instance, it probably makes more sense to just focus your studies in "business"/"corporate"/in-house topics, and then throw your apps to these Hollywood studios if that is your thing. If it doesnt work out, well you have about a zillion other businesses/industries in CA that you can pursue. But if you focus your studies on Entertainment law...non-entertainment law firms might take a look at your transcript, think that you are a joker or just biding your time, and toss your application in the trash.

Just my $0.02

[articulably suspect]

If I were you, I wouldn't base my decision on an loose interest in entertainment law. Your interests may shift drastically and it's best to put yourself in a position where you'll have optimal opportunities. However, if you're fairly certain you want entertainment law and want the best shot possible at it, perhaps going with one of the LA area schools would position you better for that practice...as opposed to Hastings.

I'm of the impression that a contingency sholly is pretty much like getting no scholly at all.

[General Tso]

If I were you, I wouldn't base my decision on an loose interest in entertainment law. Your interests may shift drastically and it's best to put yourself in a position where you'll have optimal opportunities. However, if you're fairly certain you want entertainment law and want the best shot possible at it, perhaps going with one of the LA area schools would position you better for that practice...as opposed to Hastings.

I'm of the impression that a contingency sholly is pretty much like getting no scholly at all.

Exactly...I kept telling myself I wanted to do Tax before starting school. Then you realize how freaking hard 1L year is, how busy you will be reading cases and doing moot court and all the other crap they force on you, and then to take on THE most difficult 1L course at Hastings -- Federal Income Tax -- you get the idea...

I may still do tax, I am thinking of taking it next year or something. But the point is you don't really know what you like until you've been there. At first glance, Contracts seems like a totally interesting, totally practical topic....that is until you get a crazy, theory-obsessed professor who forces you to read all kinds of boring academic crap.

And I agree, contingency scholarships are not desirable. I balked at the risk last year, but this year I think I may have taken it.

[Danteshek]

I have no interest in entertainment law, so I don't really have a stake in this debate. Having said that, the OP should not give short thrift to the importance of being in Los Angeles (Loyola, Southwestern, Pepperdine, whatever). Los Angeles is where the desirable entertainment externships are located. It is difficult to come down here for the summer. Not only must you compete with students who have a genuine interest in entertainment law (often experience in the industry - not just a "loose interest"), you also have to compete with students from all over the country who want to work in Los Angeles for the summer. The most important thing you can do is build your network. One way you can do this is by getting close to Professor Lind, who has a lot of pull in this town and regularly helps students get their desired placements. Obviously, once you are in Los Angeles, it is up to you to put yourself out there and make yourself known.

[articulably suspect]

If I were you, I wouldn't base my decision on an loose interest in entertainment law. Your interests may shift drastically and it's best to put yourself in a position where you'll have optimal opportunities. However, if you're fairly certain you want entertainment law and want the best shot possible at it, perhaps going with one of the LA area schools would position you better for that practice...as opposed to Hastings.

I'm of the impression that a contingency sholly is pretty much like getting no scholly at all.

Exactly...I kept telling myself I wanted to do Tax before starting school. Then you realize how freaking hard 1L year is, how busy you will be reading cases and doing moot court and all the other crap they force on you, and then to take on THE most difficult 1L course at Hastings -- Federal Income Tax -- you get the idea...

I may still do tax, I am thinking of taking it next year or something. But the point is you don't really know what you like until you've been there. At first glance, Contracts seems like a totally interesting, totally practical topic....that is until you get a crazy, theory-obsessed professor who forces you to read all kinds of boring academic crap.

And I agree, contingency scholarships are not desirable. I balked at the risk last year, but this year I think I may have taken it.

Yeah, I think going in with a general concept of what you want to do and having interests is great, but basing your decision on that which will most likely change, I think, is not the best approach to choosing a school. IDK, there are so many factors to consider.

You really think you would have taken the money if you were making that decision now? As a public sector oriented individual, I guess it’s different…with IBR, LRAP, etc., but if you were able to pull off 1/3 at a decent T2 with relatively low debt and slightly less opportunities, maybe it’s worth the risk?

If an applicant’s interest were to acquire employment at a non-big city(not as competitive-SF, NYC, etc) PD or DA office, maybe going to Santa Clara with the contingency as opposed to Hastings ticket is worth it, for example. Starting out at roughly 60K(in the counties I’ve researched) isn’t so bad, especially if your debt is low. The offices I've looked at hit 100K after 5 or so years.

[articulably suspect]

Not only must you compete with students who have a genuine interest in entertainment law (often experience in the industry - not just a "loose interest"), you also have to compete with students from all over the country who want to work in Los Angeles for the summer.

I was referring to OP's remark: "I've also been looking a lot at entertainment law...", which to me reads "it's something I've considered." To my mind, it doesn't sound like he/she is dead set on that field.

[General Tso]

If I were you, I wouldn't base my decision on an loose interest in entertainment law. Your interests may shift drastically and it's best to put yourself in a position where you'll have optimal opportunities. However, if you're fairly certain you want entertainment law and want the best shot possible at it, perhaps going with one of the LA area schools would position you better for that practice...as opposed to Hastings.

I'm of the impression that a contingency sholly is pretty much like getting no scholly at all.

Exactly...I kept telling myself I wanted to do Tax before starting school. Then you realize how freaking hard 1L year is, how busy you will be reading cases and doing moot court and all the other crap they force on you, and then to take on THE most difficult 1L course at Hastings -- Federal Income Tax -- you get the idea...

I may still do tax, I am thinking of taking it next year or something. But the point is you don't really know what you like until you've been there. At first glance, Contracts seems like a totally interesting, totally practical topic....that is until you get a crazy, theory-obsessed professor who forces you to read all kinds of boring academic crap.

And I agree, contingency scholarships are not desirable. I balked at the risk last year, but this year I think I may have taken it.

Yeah, I think going in with a general concept of what you want to do and having interests is great, but basing your decision on that which will most likely change, I think, is not the best approach to choosing a school. IDK, there are so many factors to consider.

You really think you would have taken the money if you were making that decision now? As a public sector oriented individual, I guess it’s different…with IBR, LRAP, etc., but if you were able to pull off 1/3 at a decent T2 with relatively low debt and slightly less opportunities, maybe it’s worth the risk?

If an applicant’s interest were to acquire employment at a non-big city(not as competitive-SF, NYC, etc) PD or DA office, maybe going to Santa Clara with the contingency as opposed to Hastings ticket is worth it, for example. Starting out at roughly 60K(in the counties I’ve researched) isn’t so bad, especially if your debt is low. The offices I've looked at hit 100K after 5 or so years.

Well it's just that I don't know that my options at Hastings will be much better than if I had gone to a lesser school like USD. Biglaw just isn't a realistic option for anyone not at the top of their class...no matter what school - Berkeley, UCLA, Hastings, Loyola -- doesnt matter much. As far as I can tell grades don't seem to matter much either right now. It's a very different job market than it was just a few years ago. It's all about connections, and while Hastings has good alumni networks, Loyola and USD do as well.

I am thinking that I will probably earn around 60-75k at a small private firm out of Hastings (just my feeling based on talking to classmates and my own job search results). In the past someone in the top half at Hastings probably could have started out closer to 100k, but all those jobs are being gobbled by Berk/Stanford types that arent getting biglaw anymore.

So if that is the end result, I think I could have done something similar out of Loyola or USD, although at much lower debt. Of course, I know now that law school isn't as hard as I thought it would be and that staying in the top 1/3 isn't that difficult. Then again, I have heard competition is much higher at T2s than at T1s, because everyone is trying to transfer. So I don't know...either option probably would have been fine in the end I guess. I could go back and forth all day

[fenderjsm88]

I don't think that it's worth the risk to go to a tier 4 like Southwestern just because they have a good entertainment law program. I know two things about entertainment law: 1. It's a total connections game. 2. You can't usually do it straight out of school. If all you want to do is work in the entertainment industry in some shape or form, it is probably wiser to move to LA, get a job working as a PA/mailroom clerk/etc. and work your way up. I've known people who think that law school in LA is a path to becoming some kind of Ari Gold-esque Hollywood bigshot, but I would argue that you should only go to law school if you would be content working as a normal everyday lawyer, especially since entertainment law is such a rough field to break into (and I doubt it's that different from being a normal lawyer anyways - I think most of what you do is negotiate contracts.)

From what I've heard, Loyola and Southwestern seem to have better name recognition in SoCal, despite the fact that Pepperdine outranks them. I applied to Pepperdine and received a nice scholly, so I'm doing a lot of research on the school, and I'm currently in correspondence with a current student who has a lot of experience with the Entertainment Law Society. From what I've heard, Pepperdine's Entertainment Law Society gets good speakers, holds networking events, a good number of students get high-profile internships in Hollywood - basically, they give you the opportunity to make connections in the field, which is all they can do. I assume Southwestern and Loyola have similar programs, except superior since they have entertainment law journals as well (I imagine those are good for gaining name recognition in the Industry.) Also, based on everything I've heard from people that actually go there, Pepperdine has plenty of liberals. Just join the Democratic Law Society or ACLU Pepperdine chapter and you might as well be anywhere else.

My uncle is really good friends with a guy that does legal counsel at Paramount. I'll try and find out where he went to school, how he got his job, etc. and talk about it on here, since a lot of people on TLS have questions about the field of entertainment law.

[Danteshek]

Hopefully, when you're at Pepperdine, you'll learn not to talk shit about Southwestern. Otherwise, you'll sound not only like a douchebag, but also ignorant.

[fenderjsm88]

Hopefully, when you're at Pepperdine, you'll learn not to talk shit about Southwestern. Otherwise, you'll sound not only like a douchebag, but also ignorant.

Didn't say anything negative about Southwestern. Actually I said it has a better program than Pepperdine, as well as better name recognition. Are you insecure or something? Also, I'm most likely staying in the east so it will be a non-issue. Thanks for the constructive criticism though. Best of luck!