Eileen A. Scallen

Professor of Practice and Director of Part-time Faculty

  • B.A. St. Olaf College, 1981
  • M.A. University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, 1983
  • J.D. University of Minnesota School of Law, 1986
  • UCLA Faculty Since 2013

Eileen A. Scallen is Professor of Practice and Director of Part-time Faculty. From 2013 to 2017, she served as the Associate Dean for Curriculum and Academic Affairs at UCLA School of Law. As Director of Part-time Faculty, Professor Scallen remains responsible for helping hire, train, coach, and provide teaching feedback to UCLA School of Law’s extensive and important part-time faculty.

Professor Scallen received her M.A. from the University of Minnesota, Twin Cities and her J.D. magna cum laude from the University of Minnesota Law School, where she was Editor-in-Chief of the Minnesota Law Review and a member of the Order of the Coif. Following law school, she clerked for the Honorable A. Wallace Tashima of the U.S. District Court in the Central District of California, and then became an associate with Latham & Watkins, in downtown Los Angeles.

Professor Scallen began her academic career at the University of California, Hastings College of Law. She received the “Outstanding Faculty Member” award” in 1992, and served as Associate Academic Dean from 1996 to 1998. In 2000, Scallen returned to Minnesota for family reasons, joining the faculty at William Mitchell (now called Mitchell Hamline) College of Law as the first lateral, hired as a tenured full Professor of Law at the law school. While back in Minnesota, she did extensive pro bono work for national, state, and local LGBT organizations in addition to expanding her research and teaching interests. In 2007, she received the “Everyday Hero” award from Twin Cities Pride for her pro bono service to the LGBTQ community. Professor Scallen also has volunteered many hours of training on evidentiary topics to state court judges through their judicial education programs in both Minnesota and California.

Her current research interests include rethinking theories of evidentiary privilege, and developing new theories of influence in small group and team settings. She is the primary author of California Evidence Courtroom Manual (with Glen Weissenberger) (published annually by LexisNexis), and Working Together in Law: Teamwork and Small Group Skills for Legal Professionals (with Sophie M. Sparrow and Clifford S. Zimmerman) (Carolina Academic Press, 2014). She has most recently taught Evidence, Civil Procedure, and Advocacy. She has also taught Cross-Cultural Negotiations and Dispute Resolution, Theories of Legal Argumentation & Persuasion, Team Leadership for Lawyers, and Estates and Trusts.

Bibliography

  • Books
    • Working Together in Law: Teamwork and Small Group Skills for Legal Professionals (with Sophie M. Sparrow & Clifford S. Zimmerman). Carolina Academic Press (2014).
    • California Evidence: Courtroom Manual (With G. Weissenberger). LexisNexis (2002). Updated annually.
  • Articles And Chapters
    • In a World of Vanishing Trials: Why the Evidence Course Matters More than Ever--and Could Matter Even More, 36 Review of Litigation 513 (2017).
    • Foundationalism and Ground Truth in American Legal Philosophy: Classical Rhetoric, Realism, and Pragmatism, in On Philosophy in American Law, (edited by F. Mootz, III, Cambridge University Press, 2009).
    • Coping with Crawford: Confrontation of Children and other Challenging Witnesses, 35 William Mitchell Law Review 1558 (2009). Mitchell Open Access | SSRN
    • Proceeding with Caution: Making and Amending the Federal Rules of Evidence, 36 Southwestern University Law Review 601 (2008).
    • California Supreme Court’s Major Confrontation Clause Decision in People v. Cage, 40 Cal. 4th 965, LexisNexis Expert Commentary (December 2007).
    • Book Review, Nobody Likes a Sophist until They Need One, 11 Penn State Law Review 923 (2006). Review of For the Sake of Argument: Practical Reasoning, Character, and the Ethics of Belief, by Eugene Garver.
    • American Legal Education: A Classic Beginning, 74 (5) The Hennepin Lawyer 20 (2005).
    • Relational and Informational Privileges and the Case of the Mysterious Mediation Privilege, 38 Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review 573 (2004). SSRN
    • Evidence Law as Pragmatic Legal Rhetoric: Reconnecting Legal Scholarship, Teaching and Ethics, 21 Quinnipiac Law Review 813 (2003). Mitchell Open Access | SSRN
    • 'Mere’ Rhetoric about Common Ground and Different Perspectives: A Comment on Twining’s “Evidence as a Multi-Disciplinary Subject”, 2 Law, Probability & Risk 109 (2003). SSRN
    • Analyzing “The Politics of [Evidence] Rulemaking”, 53 Hastings Law Journal 843 (2002). Mitchell Open Access | SSRN
    • The Politics of [Evidence] Rulemaking, 53 Hastings Law Journal 733 (2002).
    • Legal Alchemy: The Use and Misuse of Science in the Law [book review], AALS Evidence Section Newsletter 3 (Spring 2000).
    • The Ethos of Expert Witnesses: Confusing the Admissibility, Sufficiency and Credibility of Expert Testimony (with W. Wiethoff), 49 Hastings Law Journal 1143 (1998). Mitchell Open Access
    • Reading the Federal Rules of Evidence Realistically: A Response to Professor Imwinkelried (with A. Taslitz), 75 Oregon Law Review 429 (1996).
    • Presence and Absence in Lochner: Making Rights Real, 23 Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly 621 (1996). SSRN
    • American Legal Argumentation: The Law and Literature/Rhetoric Movement, 9 Argumentation (1995).
    • Classical Rhetoric, Practical Reasoning, and the Law of Evidence, 44 American University Law Review 1717 (1995). SSRN
    • Interpreting the Federal Rules of Evidence: The Use and Abuse of the Advisory Committee Notes, 28 Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review 1283 (1995). Mitchell Open Access | SSRN
    • The Big Game: Metaphor and Education in the Simpson Trial, 6 Hastings Women’s Law Journal 289 (1995). SSRN
    • Discussion: Interpretation of Federal Rule 801, 16 Mississippi College of Law Review 21, 25 (1995).
    • Discussion: Confrontation and the Utility of Rules, 16 Mississippi College of Law Review 87, 114 (1995).
    • Judgment, Justification and Junctions in the Rhetorical Criticism of Legal Texts, 60 Southern Communication Journal 68 (1994).
    • Promises Broken vs. Promises Betrayed: Metaphor, Analogy, and the New Fiduciary Principle, 1993 University of Illinois Law Review 897 (1993).
    • Metaphor and Reason in Judicial Opinions by Haig Bosmajian [book review], 10 Constitutional Commentary 480 (1993).
    • Constitutional Dimensions of Hearsay Reform: Toward a Three-Dimensional Confrontation Clause, 76 Minnesota Law Review 623 (1992). SSRN
    • Sailing the Uncharted Seas of Bad Faith: Seaman’s Direct Buying Service, Inc. v. Standard Oil Co. [case comment], 69 Minnesota Law Review 1161 (1985).
  • Other Publications
    • The New Minnesota E-Discovery Rules: The Times They Are A-Changin’, LexisNexis Emerging Issues (July 9, 2008).
    • California Supreme Court’s Major Confrontation Clause Decision in People v. Cage, 40 Cal. 4th 965, LexisNexis Expert Commentary (December 2007).