B.A., Johns Hopkins University
J.D., University of Michigan
The Law and Ethics of Lawyering
Real Estate Transactions
Trusts and Estates
Matthew I. Hall joined the University of Georgia School of Law faculty in 2009.
His research interests are in the area of federal jurisdiction and civil procedure, with a focus on the Article III jurisdiction of federal courts. His work has been published by the law reviews at Fordham, George Washington, the University of Pennsylvania, the University of Southern California, Stanford, UCLA and Washington University.
Before entering academia, Hall served as a judicial clerk for Judge David F. Levi of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California and for Judge Marsha S. Berzon of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. He also practiced law for five years in San Francisco, specializing in complex commercial and appellate litigation. In 2006, Hall left private practice to work for the chairman of the federal judiciary's Standing Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure. In this capacity, Hall assisted in the judiciary's ongoing project to revise and improve the procedural rules that govern litigation in federal courts. Hall then served as an adjunct professor at the University of California, Davis, School of Law and as a visiting assistant professor at the University of the Pacific McGeorge School of Law.
Hall earned his B.A. in history, cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa, from the Johns Hopkins University and his J.D. cum laude from the University of Michigan, where he served as articles editor of the Michigan Law Review.
Cocurricular Learning in Management Education: Lessons from Legal Education's Use of Student-Edited Journals, J. Mgmt. Educ. (June 2021)
The Nature of Standing, 29 Wm. & Mary Bill of Rts. J. 67 (2020) (with C. Turner).
Who has Standing to Sue the President Over Allegedly Unconstitutional Emoluments?, 95 Wash. U. L Rev. 757 (2017).
Making Sense of Legislative Standing, 90 S. Cal. L. Rev. 1 (2016).
The Prudential Third-Party Standing of Family-Owned Corporations,162 U. Pa. L. Rev. Online 151 (2014).
How Congress Could Defend DOMA in Court (and Why the BLAG Cannot), 65 Stan. L. Rev. Online 92 (2013).
Standing of Intervenor Defendants in Public Law Litigation, 80 Fordham L. Rev. 1539 (2012).
Asymmetrical Jurisdiction, 58 UCLA L. Rev. 1257 (2011).
The Partially Prudential Doctrine of Mootness, 77 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 562 (2009).