Home | Professionals | Stephen E. Smith

Stephen E. Smith

Special Counsel

San Francisco

1100 Sansome Street

San Francisco, CA 94111

Office: +1 415.956.1900

Direct: +1 628.283.3638

[email protected]

Stephen Smith is Special Counsel at Bartko Pavia LLP in the Litigation Practice.

Biography

Stephen Smith is Special Counsel at Bartko Pavia LLP in the Litigation Practice. In addition to his practice, Stephen is an Associate Clinical Professor of Law at Santa Clara University. At Santa Clara, he teaches Constitutional Law, Evidence, and Legal Writing and Research. He also serves as faculty advisor to the Santa Clara Law Review. Stephen’s published scholarship addresses the Sixth Amendment’s Right to a Public Trial, legal rhetoric, and other subjects.

Before joining Bartko Pavia LLP, Stephen was a litigator with a number of San Francisco law firms, representing clients in varied industries. He also served as law clerk to the late United States District Judge Richard A. Enslen and to the U.S. Department of Labor’s Office of Administrative Law Judges.

Education

  • J.D., University of California College of the Law, San Francisco
  • B.A., Northeastern University

Admissions

  • California State Courts
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
  • United States District Court for the Northern District of California
  • United States District Court for the Eastern District of California
  • United States District Court for the Central District of California
  • United States District Court for the Southern District of California

Publications

  • Public Trials and Plain Error, Krista D. Bordatto, Stephen E. Smith, 23 The University of New Hampshire Law Review 65 (2025)  
  • The Right to a Public Trial, Conditional Courtroom Entry and Tiers of Constitutional Scrutiny, 57 Ind. L. Rev. 421 (2023)  
  • “The Rule” and the Constitution: Witness Exclusion and the Right to a Public Trial, 56 U.I.C. L. Rev. 1 (2022)
  • United States v. Allen and Judicial Review of Early Pandemic Courtroom Closures, 99 Den. L. Rev. Forum 1 (2022)
  • The Online Criminal Trial as a Public Trial, 51 Southwestern Law Review 116 (2021)  
  • What’s in a Name? Strict Scrutiny and the Right to a Public Trial, 57 Idaho L. Rev. 447 (2021)  
  • Legal Education During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Put Health, Safety and Equity First, Catherine J.K. Sandoval, Patricia A. Cain, Stephen F. Diamond, Allen S. Hammond, Jean C. Love, Stephen E. Smith, & Solmaz Nabipour, M.D., 61 Santa Clara L. Rev. 367 (2021)
  • The Right to a Public Trial in the Time of COVID-19, 77 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. Online 1 (May 19, 2020)
  • Asking Too Much: The Ninth Circuit’s Erroneous Review of Social Security Disability Determinations, 24 Lewis & Clark Law Review Online Journal 1 (03/18/2020)  
  • Glatt v. Fox Searchlight and the Rhetorical Value of Inter-Circuit Dialogue, 50 University of San Francisco Law Review Online Forum 479-489 (2016)
  • The Right to a Public Trial and Closing the Courtroom to Disruptive Spectators, 93 Washington University Law Review 235-246 (2015)
  • A Rhetorical Exercise: Persuasive Word Choice, 49 University of San Francisco Law Review Forum 37-39 (2015)
  • Defendant Silence and Rhetorical Stasis, 46 Connecticut Law Review 19-26 (2013)  
  • The Poetry of Persuasion: Early Literary Theory and Its Advice to Legal Writers, 6 Journal of the Association of Legal Writing Directors 55-74 (2009)
  • Due Process and the Subpoena Power in Federal Environmental, Health, and Safety Whistleblower Proceedings, 32 University of San Francisco Law Review 533-560 (1998)
Scroll DownReturn to Top