Top Law Schools

I want to work in LA, not aiming for BigLaw just want a decent job. Have a guaranteed job upon graduation but want to keep my options open to not have to work there should I end up not liking that type of law practice.

Loyola: free
Pepperdine: free
Notre Dame: 70k debt upon grad
ASU: 11k debt at grad

If you aren't wanting to go into Biglaw but want to "keep your options open," based on employment/starting salary statistics and relative prestige, I would say ASU is your better option, provided you are willing to travel to LA area for any summer positions (if you're lucky enough to swing one that is) in order to beef up your resume with LA-area law firms. In the grand scheme of things, $11,000 in debt is pretty insignificant, and Arizona State represents a big jump from either Loyola or Pepperdine. Notre Dame is about on par with ASU but has better Biglaw numbers and has a little bit more of a marketable national "brand." However, if you are content working at boutique law firms and being in LA is your number one priority, there's no point in going into extra debt.

Alternatively, if you think you might want to do Biglaw, Notre Dame... paying off $70,000 with a Biglaw job is not exceedingly difficult, provided you don't have any other significant sources of debt.

The sticking point being, how many specific goals do you have? If you are just after a J.D., any J.D., know you want to stay in LA, and don't particularly care what your starting salary is (i.e., Biglaw is out of the question), then it is pretty hard to beat Pepperdine for free - have you seen its campus?

What are the stips on the Loyola and Pepperdine scholarships?

The stip for Pepperdine is good standing (2.0) and Loyola is top 75% (2.. My goal is to one day either work as an in-house counsel or start my own firm. My dad is matching the scholarships I am offered so that makes Pepperdine a break even situation, whereas with Loyola I'd actually be making a few thousand dollars from his scholarship. The latter sounds realllyyyyy appealing as a nest egg to fund my own apartment upon my graduation, but if I have less opportunity or a bad time in law school then that doesn't seem worth it to me.

Not saying this to be mean but I think the poster who advised ASU was wrong about pretty much everything he said. It makes no sense and is clearly the worst option here, IMO.

I would choose whichever of Loyola/Pepperdine you prefer here. Keep in mind that in house probably won't happen because usually you need a stint in big law first and chances of that are remote from any of these schools. If you're good with small firm/local gov and are willing to hustle then I think Loyola/Pepperdine for totally free are fine.

With a parent matching scholarship I personally would retake/reapply for UCLA/USC at the very least.

I get a strong ambivalence toward law school vibe, are you sure this is what you want to do? Are you just going because your dad is a lawyer and wants/expects you to go?

Yeah ASU makes very little sense here. If you have a parent subsidizing your cost, you should do them (and yourself) a favor and retake for USC. Assuming your GPA isn't a trainwreck, a 166 makes you an auto-admit, and ~168 gets you really good money.

Taking a year off, retaking, and going to USC will put you in a much better situation for non-biglaw employment (both right out of school and in 20 years), and it would be worth taking a little debt over going to Pepperdine/Loyola for free.

But if you must go this year, take one of the "free" options and don't got to Notre Dame/ASU.

I'm not ambivalent whatsoever, I'm just not like all the thee TLSers and am not interested in biglaw at all. My dad will only match my scholarships this year (he's not a lawyer) which isn't why I'm dying to go this year, I'm just really ready and like my options. I just can't decide between them D: I have a really crappy GPA as well and was testing 160s before my LSAT and got a 165 so I don't really want to push my luck haha

(Sorry it's hard to act excited about any of these schools on here because a lot of people have shot me, and others, down for it on this site)

krispymenudo wrote:(Sorry it's hard to act excited about any of these schools on here because a lot of people have shot me, and others, down for it on this site)

I mean, Loyola/Pepperdine for freesies is totally fine as long as you know what your likely outcomes are. You might really struggle to find a job, but if you're ok with that then by all means, go. I don't think most people would really fault you for that. Consider that it is 3 years of your life you are giving up, but at least there is no debt, which is the worst thing.

If you were going to end up 200K in debt with a goal of BIG ENTERTAINMENT LAWZZ or BIG INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC INTEREST SPACE SPORTS AGENT LAWZ then you would probably get a different response, at least from me.

There is nothing at risk by retaking and there is a lot to gain. While going to Pepperdine or Loyola for free are defensible options, it's going to be a big struggle to become a lawyer (half of your classmates will fail at it). If you want to be a lawyer, retaking and going to a better school, like USC, is readily attainable and is a safer bet.

I also have an average GPA and blah softs, and correctly answered only two or three more questions than you on the LSAT, and USC offered me close a full ride. Use the LSAT forum resources and take a year to make some dough and you'll be in a better position.

But if you've got the money and know the risks, you could be in a much worse situation.

Will_McAvoy wrote:There is nothing at risk by retaking and there is a lot to gain. While going to Pepperdine or Loyola for free are defensible options, it's going to be a big struggle to become a lawyer (half of your classmates will fail at it). If you want to be a lawyer, retaking and going to a better school, like USC, is readily attainable and is a safer bet.

I also have an average GPA and blah softs, and correctly answered only two or three more questions than you on the LSAT, and USC offered me close a full ride. Use the LSAT forum resources and take a year to make some dough and you'll be in a better position.

But if you've got the money and know the risks, you could be in a much worse situation.

In OP's defense, I don't think USC/UCLA are options even with a retake due to his 3.1 LSDAS GPA-they don't dip down on GPA that far, even for URMs with high LSATs. They're much more favorable to reverse splitters than splitters, unfortunately.

eta: I take it back. There are a handful of people (almost all AA males) on LSN with upper 160s and GPAs below 3.3 who were accepted to USC, but unless OP is AA, I think it's still highly unlikely he'd get in even with a retake.

Ah, didn't realize it was that low, my bad. Last year USC took three people with 3.1s (167, 168, 169) who were not URMs. But if OPs dad will only help for this year, then USC will probably be prohibitively expense with that GPA.

Disregard my comments OP. Freebie to Loyola or Pepperdine aren't bad spots here. Good luck.

Post removed.

Based on the knowledge that you already have a guaranteed job in California, and the fact that you are only looking to create more professional flexibility in case you do not particularly care for this job -- I would still stick with my original assessment that ASU/Notre Dame are your better options.

Once you have passed the Bar examination in a state and you have relevant job experiences/references in that state, whether or not your law school has strong regional pull or not is more or less a moot point, you will be judged on your work record. If you supplement your resume with internships/externships in California (provided you can arrange them), pass the Bar in California, and then take your guaranteed position in California, you will have no problems finding jobs in California should you choose to leave that position. Now, you may have to stay at that first job for 3-5 years to gain marketable experience, but afterward you will be fine to move on to whatever. Furthermore, sure, 69.8% of Loyola's Class of 2013 graduates found work in California (**just as an example, not picking on Loyola by any means**), that's great if you are picking primarily based on your desired region of practice. However, only 41.4% of its graduates found long-term, full-time legal jobs, only 25.3% of graduates secured jobs prior to graduation, 1/3 of graduates are actively seeking out new jobs (meaning they weren't happy with the ones they got), and 27% of graduates remained unemployed. So, if you just look at the regional placement record - awesome! - but, if you are looking for more professional flexibility - not so much.

When you are making your decision about where to attend law school, the two most important factors to consider are cost of attendance and employment outlook. No matter what anyone says based on anecdotal evidence or gut feelings, the statistics are what matters. Statistically, very few people from ASU go to CA to practice law, but you already have a guaranteed position in CA so, again, that isn't particularly applicable to you. For you, based on your unique circumstances, I would think the overall jobs data should be the primary deciding factor in your decision-making process, especially since even $70,000 in debt is not really that much. You can sort through this data on your own to arrive at your own opinion by comparing numbers for each school on Law School Transparency, Above the Law, and by viewing each school's respective ABA profile.

In my opinion, however, I believe you have to make this decision with clearer professional goals in mind. If you can't articulate a clear professional goal beyond "I want to be a lawyer and I want to stay in Los Angeles," then you are unlikely to find yourself in a strong position to pursue your professional goals once they become clearer to you. You should reverse engineer your profession, start at your desired destination and work backwards. Hope this helps!

How is ASU a "big jump" from Pep/Loyola for someone who wants a job in CA? Why would someone from CA go to ASU to get a job in CA? That makes no sense.

Likewise, spending 70K more to go to ND to try and get a job in CA makes no sense.

The only school that provides anything by way of "flexibility" is ND because it is a clear cut above. But still high end outcomes from there aren't particularly likely.

With modest career goals the only thing that makes sense here are the two CA schools. Would I personally ever go to either? No, their job placement is unacceptable to me. But I'm not the OP. Given the OP's exploding offer (which is odd to me, but whatever), GPA, career goals, and apparent level of risk aversion I say YOLO on down to whichever they prefer. But don't go to ASU or ND for a job in CA when you can go to a school that is A)Cheaper and B)In the market you want for networking purposes/ties to local employers.