Loyola & Pepperdine- Equal or Not? Forum

[Loyola341L]

With Pepperdine moving into the top 50 in the USNEWS rankings, should they be considered a step above Loyola now? I’m an incoming law student whose general interest is corporate law, Biglaw preferred but willing to grind at lower income to get where I want in my career. If you’re here to tell me “nEiThEr ThEy’re not T-14!”, you can just not, I’m well aware of the risks of attending a lower ranked school.

The details:
-Non-traditional student, work experience in regulatory compliance
-3.2 GPA, 164 LSAT
-Took LSAT 2x
-GPA lower than I’m capable of due to personal issues (now resolved) resulting in my attendance at 3 different undergrads
-I’m accepted into both schools, tuition minus scholarship is within $2.5k of each other.

I have connections at a DTLA Biglaw firm that regularly hires Loyola grads, but also, Pepperdine has moved up the rankings into the top 50. Loyola is my preference, is Pepperdine’s ranking important enough to change my mind?

[QContinuum]

Loyola LA placed 17.1% of the class of 2018 into BigLaw or federal clerkships. 24.0% - almost a quarter of the entire class - were unable to secure any full-time work as a lawyer.

Pepperdine placed 14.9% of the class of 2018 into BigLaw or federal clerkships, which is functionally identical to Loyola LA. 32.1% struck out of the practice of law altogether. So it looks like Loyola's still better than Pepperdine. It has similar upside - 17.1% vs. 14.9%, which is about the same - but markedly smaller downside - 1 in 4 striking out of law, versus 1 in 3.

I’m an incoming law student whose general interest is corporate law, Biglaw preferred but willing to grind at lower income to get where I want in my career. If you’re here to tell me “nEiThEr ThEy’re not T-14!”, you can just not, I’m well aware of the risks of attending a lower ranked school.

Of course, the numbers don't really matter, because as you've said, you will be in that 15-17% that land BigLaw, and not the 1 in 3 that strike out of being a lawyer (any kind of lawyer at any salary, however low). You're willing to "grind", unlike your future classmates, who are either lazier or less determined to succeed than you are, for whatever reason.

[Sackboy]

You're willing to "grind", unlike your future classmates, who are either lazier or less determined to succeed than you are, for whatever reason.

Just to be clear, OP. QContinuum is being sarcastic, because you're relying on crappy logic.

Everyone comes to law school to "grind." You have a very real chance of ending up in the 1/4 or 1/3, depending on what school you pick, who are not practicing law 9 months after graduation, which is the time period that these statistics reflect. That's great that you resolved some issues that affected your academics, but stories like yours are a dime a dozen. People come into law school refocused and are all competing to be in that 15% who get biglaw. Many of those kids in the 1/4 or 1/3 who end up with no legal job 9 months after graduation were trying their hardest and hustling. With this incredibly saturated legal market, unemployment in the law 9 months after graduation is more of a reflection of picking a bad law school than it is of not trying hard in law school.

This board also isn't T13 or bust. This board recommends solutions for individual situations. Your situation is that you want biglaw. Biglaw, for the most part, requires you to be in the top 75%+ at a T13 school, top 50%ish at most of the T20 schools, and top 5-15% at MOST other law schools. While your GPA is on the lower end and retaking might just get you into a T13 school with a lot of debt, you should at least be sitting out and retaking to get good money at a place like UCLA, which places ~50% of its students in biglaw/federal clerkships. If you're actually smart, capable, and have resolved your academic issues, you should not be settling for a law school that gives you a 15% chance of reaching your goals or a 164 LSAT.

Also, I (and I'm pretty sure Q) noticed that you didn't list cost of attendance, likely to avoid further criticism for your attempt to make a bad life choice. Based off what I can find on law school numbers, Peppderine likely gave you $35k/yr. Based on the law school transparency charts, that puts your expected cost of attendance around $150k. If Loyola is only $2.5k from that number, you're going to be massively fucked at either school if you don't get biglaw, which, again, you only have a 15% chance of getting.

[QContinuum]

You're willing to "grind", unlike your future classmates, who are either lazier or less determined to succeed than you are, for whatever reason.

Just to be clear, OP. QContinuum is being sarcastic, because you're relying on crappy logic.

Thanks, yes, in retrospect, I should have been clearer. There's a fine line between being subtle and being too subtle.

[cavalier1138]

I’m an incoming law student whose general interest is corporate law, Biglaw preferred but willing to grind at lower income to get where I want in my career.

Where do you want to be in your career?

For the vast majority of lawyers, if they don't start in biglaw, they won't end there. They are also extremely unlikely to end in one of the career tracks that basically requires biglaw credentials. So where are you hoping to end up?

[Paul Campos]

Here is the exact number of employers in the universe who will give any weight whatsoever to the difference in ranking between Loyola and Pepperdine when making hiring decisions: Zero. Almost no employer will even be aware that Pepperdine is "ranked" higher than Loyola, assuming it even is a year or two or three from now, and the extremely rare employer who is won't care. At all.

This is not hyperbole. For all practical purposes, the rankings are completely meaningless at this level. Deciding to go to one law school rather than another because one is ranked 47 and the other 62 by the electronic rump of a defunct news magazine makes considerably less sense than making the decision on the basis of which school has a better cafeteria.

[crazywafflez]

Just to echo some of the other posters here- I know it seems harsh, but I'll tell you my circumstances coming into law school.
I had a decent GPA but lower than I'd like, mainly due to illness and family circumstances. My LSAT was 16x- I had a masters, worked in intelligence, and am a minority (however, not an URM). I had various T1 3/4 scholarships, and a T20 at sticker, and the T2 for my state at a full scholly. I chose the T1 on 3/4s scholly thinking I'd compromised, and that I would undoubtedly be top of my class. I'm median. The entire reason I chose my school was to help me reach other markets that my homestate U couldn't- those have effectively been cutoff. I love my homestate and happy to end up with the scenario I'm in (my partner does not...); but I'm locked in now- I'm worried about my debt (i'll be finishing with a bit below 70k). Go to the cheapest school possible (I'm talking keeping your debt below 40k or 50k for schools like Pepperdine); or go to a T14. There is wiggle room, but I cannot with good conscious tell another person to go to law school and take on 100k+ debt for a degree from Belmont (not that there's anything inherently wrong with Belmont, but it just doesn't have the placement power of say Vandy). And 85%+ of folks go to law school thinking they'll be top of their class- do not bank on it. Bank on being median, and if you are a realist take a look at what happens to folks on the bottom of the class.

[mushumbadiwadi]

All the naysayers here are acting as if your entire career will be determined by your first job out of law school. Let's say you end up below median and have to start as a law clerk instead of as an associate. That does not mean you are doomed to being a law clerk forever. There are plenty of Pepperdine JDs who began as law clerks and now work as senior counsels for Netflix, Apple Music, Universal, Amazon Studios, you name it. Look them up on LinkedIn. Yes, your chances at BigLaw will be slim, but your life won't be over if you don't get it. Either school is well worth it if you're getting over half your tuition covered.

[cavalier1138]

All the naysayers here are acting as if your entire career will be determined by your first job out of law school. Let's say you end up below median and have to start as a law clerk instead of as an associate. That does not mean you are doomed to being a law clerk forever.

"Law clerk" generally refers to someone who has not yet passed the bar and is working under supervision. So I have no idea why you're treating it as some sort of second tier of associate. Are you thinking of staff attorneys?

There are plenty of Pepperdine JDs who began as law clerks and now work as senior counsels for Netflix, Apple Music, Universal, Amazon Studios, you name it. Look them up on LinkedIn.

Again, I think this is stemming from your confusion over what "law clerk" means. Almost every law school graduate will have served as a "law clerk" (and I really hope you aren't confusing this with judicial clerks). I did a quick search for in-house counsel at those spots, and everyone I could find from Pepperdine had stellar credentials (law review, prior job at a good firm, etc.). Funnily enough, most of what I found was in Pepperdine's publicity materials, so I hope this isn't yet another instance of a Pepperdine admissions office account trying to mislead applicants on a public forum...

Yes, your chances at BigLaw will be slim, but your life won't be over if you don't get it. Either school is well worth it if you're getting over half your tuition covered.

You also seem to be confused about the worst outcomes from these schools. The worst outcome from Loyola/Pepperdine isn't missing out on biglaw; it's never getting hired as a lawyer. You're correct that grads from these schools won't have a reasonable shot at biglaw, but you seem to be missing the significance of that. If the OP is getting half their tuition covered, they're still looking at close to $200k in debt at graduation. Paying that off over 10 years would require monthly payments of over $2,000, which is unmanageable on most legal salaries.

So yes, your legal career is largely going to be determined by where you went to school, how you did there, and your first job(s) out of school. You don't have to like that, and you can talk about as many individual exceptions as you like. But those are exceptions, not the rule.

[Rooks]

I'm in LA. There is no difference at all between the two. I have no idea which is ranked higher, and neither will your future employer.

Also, I really hope mods aren't sarcastically giving advice in other threads. It's pretty sad seeing that happen earlier in this thread.

[nealric]

All the naysayers here are acting as if your entire career will be determined by your first job out of law school. Let's say you end up below median and have to start as a law clerk instead of as an associate. That does not mean you are doomed to being a law clerk forever. There are plenty of Pepperdine JDs who began as law clerks and now work as senior counsels for Netflix, Apple Music, Universal, Amazon Studios, you name it. Look them up on LinkedIn. Yes, your chances at BigLaw will be slim, but your life won't be over if you don't get it. Either school is well worth it if you're getting over half your tuition covered.

The thing is, your first job has a tremendous influence over your career. The vast majority of in-house folks are former biglaw, and the vast majority of folks in biglaw started there out of school (or at a federal clerkship). There’s no way I would have gotten my current in house job without having started in biglaw.

As others have pointed out, there is no lower rung of starting out as a “clerk”. If you miss biglaw, your job options will be mostly state government and small firms that don’t typically handle legal matters that concern most biglaw clients. Biglaw will sometimes hire non- partner track “staff attorneys”, but they are typically stuck in menial tasks with little prospect for advancement.

No matter how well you perform as a personal injury lawyer, you are never going to learn mergers and acquisitions. You can do quite well within that career path, but it’s a different one than the biglaw path.

That does not mean there aren’t fantastic and rewarding careers outside the biglaw track, and of course biglaw can be miserable in and of itself. If folks weren’t borrowing $200k+ to go to law school, there wouldn’t be a problem. The problem is that the salaries paid by employers that typically hire graduates from less elite schools aren’t sufficient to service the student debt load undertaken to get their jobs. If you are lucky, your salary will increase sufficiently over time. But many will end up with essentially permanent student loans that will weigh on them for decades.

[mushumbadiwadi]

Have you even read the Pepperdine NALP report from 2018? 21 students were hired as law clerks as their first job after graduation. That is what I was referring to, obviously not a judicial clerk. Do some research on these schools before you spew nonsense please. Staff Attorney is a different position that only 3 grads were hired as. It's really quite clear for anyone willing to do the research themselves. Please don't listen to these mods condescendingly talking out of their you know what.

[mushumbadiwadi]

These mods clearly have not done their homework on Pepperdine's employment outcomes. Law Clerk is the 2nd most common position Pepperdine grads are placed into as their first job (after Associate). Pepperdine produces more Law Clerks than they do Business jobs, Government jobs, or Public Interest jobs, so for these mods to dismiss it as a non-factor is quite shocking and really shows their ignorance of Pepperdine's employment outcomes.

If you don't want to take the time to read Pepperdine's 2018 NALP Report yourself, (as clearly the mods haven't), 21 graduates were hired as Law Clerks at Law Firms, while 15 went into Business jobs, 7 went into Public Interest jobs, 6 took up Judicial Clerkships, 5 went into Government jobs, and only 3 were hired as Staff Attorneys at Law Firms. That is why I suggested that if you are in the bottom half of your class at Pepperdine, Law Clerk is the most likely job outcome. These numbers make that point abundantly clear. Because it is such a common outcome for Pepperdine grads, there are a large number of graduates who have made successful careers for themselves despite beginning as Law Clerks. This is the message I wanted to get across in my original post. Obviously this is not the case for all of them, but the tunnel vision focus on immediate outcomes shortchanges many mid-ranked schools who produce graduates who have a more circuitous path to high end jobs relative to graduates of higher ranked schools. The grads I was referring to were not on Law Review, they did not have stellar resumes, and they were clearly not at the top of their class, or they would not have accepted the position of Law Clerk as their first job after graduation. I found all of these grads on LinkedIn, and it was quite easy due to the fact that Pepperdine, like all of the top 4 LA schools, has extensive ties to the entertainment industry. That is why all of the In-house counsel positions I cited were in the entertainment industry.

Furthermore, one of the mods either misinterpreted or misrepresented (depending on how well-intentioned you assume them to be) my statement regarding big law. It is pretty clear that I did not imply missing out on big law was the worst possible outcome for Pepperdine grads. First of all, I never even used the word "worst" in my entire post. This leads me to believe it was not an act of misinterpretation, but one of deliberate misrepresentation. Why someone who claims to be a moderator would do this is beyond me, but I cannot speak to the origin of their nefarious intentions. What I can speak to is the quip about misleading readers of this forum, which I find quite laughable given the blatant ignorance on display from the mods regarding the Law Clerk issue.

[cavalier1138]

These mods clearly have not done their homework on Pepperdine's employment outcomes. Law Clerk is the 2nd most common position Pepperdine grads are placed into as their first job (after Associate). Pepperdine produces more Law Clerks than they do Business jobs, Government jobs, or Public Interest jobs, so for these mods to dismiss it as a non-factor is quite shocking and really shows their ignorance of Pepperdine's employment outcomes.

You're right. The lawyers in this thread clearly aren't as informed as an... admissions officer at Pepperdine who isn't as polite as the previous plants on this site?

But since we haven't done our homework, please educate us. What is a "law clerk?" How do you know that only grads in the bottom half of Pepperdine's class were designated as "law clerks" on the NALP report? Why do you think that grads who reported being "law clerks" in the NALP report went on to become associates in biglaw or in-house counsel anywhere?

Oh, and while we're on the subject, why are you still ignoring that the most likely outcome for the bottom half of Pepperdine's class is not being employed as a lawyer at all?

[dvlthndr]

My experience from biglaw was that “law clerk” is a placeholder title given to first year associates who haven’t passed the bar. I assumed that was true for smaller firms. But it sounds like that may not be the case.

Can somebody explain if “law clerk” meals something else in a small shop (e.g., as a euphemism for a staff attorneys or some other form of non-partner track hiring). I don’t know what 20% of Pepperdine grads (and 14% of Loyola grads) are doing as “law clerks,” and why they are getting paid less than “associates” from the same graduating class. But I’d love to get an explanation.

[mushumbadiwadi]

The fact that you keep trying to label me an admissions officer is quite sad (putting it lightly). I thought it was well known that lawyers can advocate for groups or individuals that they do not themselves associate with, but I guess this guy missed out on legal ethics 101. I simply enjoy advocating for mid-ranked schools against the T13 or bust crowd.

And as for the "what does a law clerk do?" question, here ya go: https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/ca ... w-clerk-do

Some quick research would have informed you that while being hired as a law clerk at a firm after graduating is not a common outcome at most schools, it certainly does happen. The statement "there is no lower rung of starting out as a 'clerk'" is just patently false. If you want to antagonize me for calling out the mods on this site when they are making false statements such as this one, feel free to do so, but in this case the prospective students need to hear the truth.

As to your assertion that the most likely outcome for bottom half grads is not being employed as lawyers at all, that was my whole point about law clerks in the first place. Being a law clerk is not being a lawyer. That was clearly an assumption of my argument, as I said in my original post, "Let's say you end up below median and have to start as a law clerk instead of as an associate." To me, that clearly implies that being a law clerk is not the same as being a lawyer. In my other post I said being a law clerk is the most common outcome for bottom half graduates. So if you can put 2 and 2 together, you can see that I essentially said not initially being employed as a lawyer is the most common outcome for bottom half graduates. I don't really see how you missed this one.

As for the "Why do you think that grads who reported being 'law clerks' in the NALP report went on to become associates in biglaw or in-house counsel anywhere?" First of all, I never said they go on to big law. Once again you are building a straw man. You are the one who for whatever reason seems to think big law is a prerequisite for getting an in-house entertainment law job, I never made that implication. I said they go on to in-house (usually after working at a small entertainment firm) because I have seen several of these people on LinkedIn. Idk why that is so hard for you to wrap your head around. I have reached out to several of these people personally and can tell you point blank that they do exist and that beginning your career as a law clerk is by no means a death sentence.

Quick aside on big law in LA. Many graduates of LA law schools go into entertainment law, a field dominated by small firms. In my view, that is a big reason why UCLA and USC have relatively low big law placement numbers relative to similarly ranked schools. This is also why big law is by no means a prerequisite to go in-house in the entertainment industry in the same way it is for something like the banking industry.

As someone stated earlier, Pepperdine and Loyola are looked at as equals in LA. For prospective students wishing to practice in LA, they are great options for those receiving at least half tuition scholarships, as I stated in my original post. Reasonable people can disagree over how much of a scholarship is required to make them worth the cost of attendance, but to say these schools are only worth it if you receive a full ride is in my view a skewed T13 or bust type of opinion. If I were an administrator at the school would I suggest that these schools are only worth it at half price or cheaper? I doubt it.

Time for some more evidence-based analysis, which apparently is a rare commodity on these forums. Pepperdine finally leapfrogged Loyola in class of 2019 ABA employment reports, as their LST employment score jumped to over 75% (just 3% below UCI) while Loyola's fell to 65%. Pepperdine also caught up in terms of big law percentage, as they are now less than 1% below Loyola in that metric (they also more than doubled their amount of grads going to 501+ firms). What is the reason for Pepperdine's steady employment outcome improvements over the past several years? In addition to the state of the economy at the time these students graduated, it likely has to do with the relatively new dean at Pepperdine who runs a well known law blog and is probably aware that many students use these online metrics to evaluate schools.

Whether or not Pepperdine can establish themselves as the clear cut #3 school in LA given their new warchest from the Caruso donation remains to be seen, but that seems more like a long term goal, and I don't see them distancing themselves from Loyola in any meaningful way for the foreseeable future.

[The Lsat Airbender]

And as for the "what does a law clerk do?" question, here ya go: https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/ca ... w-clerk-do

Typical salary
Common salary in the U.S.: $16.63 hourly

Pepperdine cost of attendance
$318,371

LOL Pepperdine grads barely competitive with In-N-Out cashiers

[nealric]

And as for the "what does a law clerk do?" question, here ya go: https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/ca ... w-clerk-do

Some quick research would have informed you that while being hired as a law clerk at a firm after graduating is not a common outcome at most schools, it certainly does happen. The statement "there is no lower rung of starting out as a 'clerk'" is just patently false. If you want to antagonize me for calling out the mods on this site when they are making false statements such as this one, feel free to do so, but in this case the prospective students need to hear the truth.

I don't doubt there are some legal employers who have created "law clerk" as some BS title to justify underpaying new associates, but it's absolutely correct that starting out as a "law clerk" is not some sort of accepted lower rung to work your way up from. Sure, some people accept non-attorney jobs at law firms because they can't find a firm willing to take them on as an associate. To the extent they do that, they are taking a job they could have probably more easily gotten without the JD.

Your indeed link conflates different jobs that have little to do with each other. A judicial law clerk is a licensed attorney who works for a judge. In the context of a federal judge, it's a very sought after position that is hardly a lower rung. A small law firm might hire someone as a "law clerk" to go fetch coffee. There's really no universal distinction between the roles of secretary/paralegal/law clerk.

[cavalier1138]

There's something super-weird about someone who is clearly not a lawyer offering such stridently wrong opinions about legal hiring.

Others have addressed your lack of understanding of what the term "law clerk" generally means, but you're entirely wrong about the below:

As to your assertion that the most likely outcome for bottom half grads is not being employed as lawyers at all, that was my whole point about law clerks in the first place. Being a law clerk is not being a lawyer. That was clearly an assumption of my argument, as I said in my original post, "Let's say you end up below median and have to start as a law clerk instead of as an associate." To me, that clearly implies that being a law clerk is not the same as being a lawyer.

The terms "associate" and "lawyer" are not interchangeable. And the NALP from Pepperdine makes it clear that at least 15 of the graduates designated as "law clerks" are in bar passage required/anticipated positions. Pepperdine put 105 grads in private practice. It says that only 8 of those grads are not in bar passage require/anticipate positions. And the breakdown of those 105 grads says that 2 are in "Other non-Attorney Position," which leaves 6 non-lawyer grads employed in private practice. Even if those grads are all "law clerks," at least 15 of the law clerk group are expected to become attorneys.

Note also that the 8 private practice graduates account for less than 20% of the total pool of Pepperdine grads who aren't employed as lawyers within 9 months of graduation (52 total in the 2018 NALP data).

But please, continue to link more generic employment site mis-characterizations of legal jobs. We could all use a good laugh. (For anyone who wants a head-start, here's the Indeed page for lawyers, explaining that we all start out in internships after earning JDs.).

[ignorantfoot96]

[/quote]

Your indeed link conflates different jobs that have little to do with each other. A judicial law clerk is a licensed attorney who works for a judge. In the context of a federal judge, it's a very sought after position that is hardly a lower rung. A small law firm might hire someone as a "law clerk" to go fetch coffee. There's really no universal distinction between the roles of secretary/paralegal/law clerk.
[/quote]

Just to back up this point, I was a "law clerk" during the summers of undergrad. I just finished 1L so I admittedly do not know much about legal employment (scary I know), but even with my limited knowledge I can tell you that a "law clerk" should not be a position one strives for after finishing law school with ~100k in debt (or any debt because if I can do it as an undergrad, someone can do it without wasting 3 years in law school).

I don't think that either school is 100% a wrong choice to attend as long as you acknowledge that you ARE taking a gamble and that gamble might not pay off (by not paying off, I mean you literally are not practicing law but are a glorified intern).

[ESQ92]

Since the topic is derailed a bit OP, here's some advice from a younger lawyer practicing in Los Angeles.

The USNews rank doesn't matter at all. Loyola alums will favor Loyola, Pepperdine alums will favor Pepperdine, and the rest will see them as roughly equal. (Bear in mind there are a far greater number of Loyola alums). People really only remember what the rankings were when they applied to law school, and I think in the past (decades ago) Loyola may have been ranked higher.

Remember that Pepperdine is very far from most business centers in Los Angeles, whereas Loyola is right on the edge of downtown. It's easy to take a class at Loyola and work an externship at a court or clerk at a law firm in the same day. (And you should be doing this throughout school to help secure an associate job after, since Big Law is extremely difficult to land from either school). This is almost impossible at Pepperdine because of its remote location and traffic. I'm sure students there make it work, but it seems hard.

Both schools have good (for CA) bar passage rates.

That said, I wouldn't advise going to either school unless you have nearly a full scholarship or have a wealthy family that finances your education. LA is expensive - even without student loan debt.

[Anon-non-anon]

Have you even read the Pepperdine NALP report from 2018? 21 students were hired as law clerks as their first job after graduation. That is what I was referring to, obviously not a judicial clerk.

The link you provided says "A law clerk, sometimes called a judicial clerk or a judicial law clerk"

Just wanted to say that.

Otherwise, thanks for the entertainment.

[Excellent117]

OP, to strictly address your question, prospective candidates from Loyola and Pepperdine are treated as functionally equivalent by our LA biglaw hiring committee.

In terms of the bigger picture, what exactly do you want in your career, and what does "general interest in corporate law" actually mean? This set of facts just screams potential life-altering mistake to me.