In a World of Vanishing Trials: Why the Evidence Course Matters More than Ever--and Cold 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).