Daniel has argued and authored briefs on behalf of clients in the U.S. Supreme Court and federal and state courts of appeals. Daniel’s recent appellate matters include:
- Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co. (U.S. Supreme Court No. 21-1168): Representing respondent in Supreme Court merits case regarding the validity of statutes mandating consent to general personal jurisdiction.
- Ford v. TD Ameritrade, Inc. (8th Cir. No. 22-3232): Representing broker-dealer in appeal concerning the certification of a securities fraud class action in a suit arising out of the intersection between the duty of best execution, order routing and high-frequency trading.
- Biden v. Nebraska (U.S. Supreme Court No. 22-506): Amicus counsel to a coalition of former government officials, including former attorneys general and OMB directors, in a high-profile challenge to the executive action forgiving student debt.
- NCFA v. Blinken, 4 F. 4th 106 (D.C. Cir. 2021): Successfully argued and briefed a challenge to agency guidance documents, which the D.C. Circuit unanimously vacated on the grounds that the guidance imposed new legislative rules without notice and comment. Daniel also persuaded the D.C. Circuit to reverse the district court’s ruling that our client lacked associational standing.
- NYSDEC v. FERC, 991 F.3d 439 (2d Cir. 2021), and National Fuel Gas Supply Corp. v. NYSDEC, 761 F. App’x 68 (2d Cir. 2019): Successfully represented an energy company in a pair of petitions for review concerning our client’s authority to construct a federally approved natural gas pipeline. Law360 awarded the Sidley team its “Legal Lion of the Week” title for this victory.
- Rios v. Bayer Corp., 178 N.E.3d 1088 (Ill. 2020): Successfully represented a major medical device manufacturer in a case holding that a state court lacks personal jurisdiction over products liability claims brought by plaintiffs who neither reside in nor allege to have been injured in the forum state.
- United States of America v. AT&T, 916 F.3d 1029 (D.C. Cir. 2019): Successfully represented AT&T in the government’s appeal of the district court decision allowing AT&T to merge with Time Warner. The Wall Street Journal described this decision as “cement[ing] one of the biggest losses for the Justice Department’s antitrust division in a generation.”
Daniel also has experience at all stages of trial representation, from pre-litigation counseling and dispositive motions practice through discovery and trial. Daniel’s current and recent trial representations include:
- Representing a national outdoor advertising company in a complex Takings, First Amendment, preemption, and breach of contract challenge to a local government ordinance.
- Representing a leading manufacturing company in high-stakes litigation over the breach of a contract to build and operate a gas-fired power plant.
- Representing a major multinational company on charges of racketeering, trade secret theft, bank fraud, and other alleged offenses.
- Member of a trial team representing a Fortune 500 financial services company in a deceptive advertising and unfair business practices case brought by the Federal Trade Commission.
- Represented a global pharmaceutical manufacturer in a multifaceted Lanham Act case in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation.
- Obtained a writ of mandamus quashing a state trial court’s order requiring Sidley’s client to produce a privileged and highly confidential report of an outside counsel investigation.
- Successfully represented a Luxembourg-based holding company in obtaining dismissal of a multibillion-dollar fraud and breach of contract complaint in the New York Supreme Court, Commercial Division.
Daniel has experience in the emerging space of legal sports betting. In 2018, Daniel was part of a Sidley team that represented the American Gaming Association in Murphy v. NCAA, 138 S. Ct. 1461 (2018), a successful challenge to a federal ban on most forms of sports betting. Daniel also represented the nation’s largest lottery and gaming company in IGT PLC v. Garland, --- F. Supp. 3d --- (D.R.I. 2022), which successfully challenged the Department of Justice’s reinterpretation of the Wire Act to reach non-sports betting. In addition, Daniel has advised numerous companies in diverse industries on navigating federal and state gaming laws post-Murphy.
Daniel joined Sidley following a clerkship with Judge Steven Colloton of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Prior to his clerkship, Daniel completed a D.C. Bar Association Pro Bono Fellowship at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, where he represented religious nonprofits in constitutional cases before the federal courts of appeals.
Daniel received his law degree from Vanderbilt University Law School, where he was a John W. Wade Scholar and served as editor in chief of the Vanderbilt Law Review. Before attending law school, Daniel worked as a middle school math teacher with Teach for America and an aide to a member of Congress.