Professor of Law



J.D., Harvard Law School
B.A., City College of New York


California Civil Procedure
Civil Procedure I and II
Evidence Practice


Professor Koppel is an authority on civil procedure and consults widely on access to justice and court administration issues.

Professor Koppel worked in the litigation division of a major Wall Street firm for seven years following law school. He then worked in the antitrust division of AT&T before moving to a number of smaller firms. He also taught civil procedure at Adelphi University in New York before coming to Western State in 1982. In spring 2004, Professor Koppel taught Civil Procedure and Evidence at Notre Dame Law School as a visiting professor. Professor Koppel has served as an advisory member to the Civil and Small Claims Committee of the California Judicial Council from 2000 through 2013 and, during fall 2002 through fall 2003, served as consultant to the California Administrative Office of the Courts on civil discovery reform. Professor Koppel is a member of the American Law Institute. Membership in the American Law Institute, limited to 4000 judges, lawyers, and legal scholars from a wide range of practice areas is considered a recognition of professional achievement.


  • The Case for Nonmutual Privity in Vicarious Liability Relationships: Pushing the Frontiers of the Law of Claim Preclusion,  39 Campbell L. Rev. 1 (2017).
  • “Standing” in the Shadow of Erie: Federalism in the Balance in Hollingsworth v. Perry, 34 Pace L. Rev. 631 (2014)
  • The Functional and Dysfunctional Role of Formalism in Federalism: Shady Grove versus Nicastro, 16 Lewis & Clark Law Review 905 (2012)
  • The Fruits of Shady Grove: Seeing the Forest for the Trees, 44 Akron Law Review 999 (2011)
  • Reflections on the “Chimera” of a Uniform Code of State Civil Procedure: The Virtue of Vision in Procedural Reform., 58 DePaul Law Review 971 (2009)
  • Toward a New Federalism in State Civil Justice: Developing a Uniform Code of State Civil Procedure Through a Collaborative Rule-Making Process, 58 Vanderbilt Law Review 1167 (May 2005)
  • The California Supreme Court Speaks Out on Summary Judgment in Its Own Trilogy of Decisions: Has the Celotex Era Arrived?, 42 Santa Clara L. Rev. 483 (Spring 2002)
  • A Tale of Two Counties: Divergent Responses in Los Angeles and Orange County Superior Courts to the Ban on Electronic Recording in California Court Reporters Ass’n. v. Judicial Council, 37 San Diego L. Rev. 47 (April 2000)
  • When Push Comes to Shove between Court Rule and Statute: The Role of Judicial Interpretation in Court Administration, 40 Santa Clara L. Rev. 103 (1999)
  • Populism, Politics and Procedure: The Saga of Summary Judgment, and the Rulemaking Process, in California, 24 Pepperdine L. Rev. 455 (1997)
  • Book Review, An Introduction to Law and Legal Reasoning, 16 W. St. L. Rev. 809 (1989)
  • Article, “In Disarray,” California Law and Business supplement to the Los Angeles and San Francisco Daily Journal, July 14, 1997.
  • Contributor to Professor Adam Yarmolinsky’s book The Military Establishment based on my Third Year Thesis at the Harvard Law School, Free Speech in the Military (1970).


Report to the Civil & Small Claims Committee of the California Judicial Council On Significant Discovery Reforms in State and Federal Courts and their Implications for Amending California Discovery Rules and Statutes, October 16, 2003


  • Symposium on State Civil Procedure – Western State University College of Law (April 20th and 21st, 2007): I presented my proposal for drafting a uniform code of state civil procedure based upon empirical data developed through a system of controlled rules experimentation among state jurisdictions.
  • National Center for State Courts, General Council Committee Meeting – New York City (May 14, 2002): Civil Discovery – How to Reduce Transactional Costs Without Reducing Fairness
  • National Center for State Courts, Justice Roundtable – Washington, D.C. (November 21, 2003): Civil Discovery: Reducing Costs, Ensuring Fairness, panel member.