Dan Dorris represents plaintiffs and defendants in complex civil litigation at the trial and appellate stages. At the trial level, he has successfully represented clients at evidentiary hearings, litigated dispositive motions, and represented clients throughout the discovery process. At the appellate level, he has argued appeals and drafted briefs in cases before multiple U.S. Courts of Appeals.
Dan has particular experience with antitrust and securities cases, multi-district litigation, and class actions. He has also represented telecommunications clients in regulatory proceedings before the Federal Communications Commission and the Department of Justice.
Represented the National Credit Union Administration as liquidating agent in a series of lawsuits against major financial institutions regarding the sale of residential mortgage-backed securities. The suits were filed in three federal district courts and generated multiple appeals to three Courts of Appeals. Dan was involved in all aspects of the litigation, including drafting the complaints, briefing dispositive motions and appeals, taking and defending fact and expert depositions, and managing discovery. Each suit was resolved prior to trial, with defendants in three suits offering judgment for the full damage demand plus attorneys’ fees. More than $5.1 billion has been recovered.
Successfully briefed and argued against an appeal brought by two groups of objectors to a class action settlement agreement. The settlement agreement concerned overpayments for motor fuel and resolved more than eight years of multi-district litigation. See In re Motor Fuel Temperature Sales Practices Litig., 872 F.3d 1094 (10th Cir. 2017).
Defended Facebook, Inc., against antitrust claims brought by Social Ranger, LLC, relating to social games on Facebook. The case settled shortly before trial. Social Ranger, LLC v. Facebook, Inc. (D. Del.).
Successfully represented iHeartMedia, Bain Capital, and THL in the Delaware Court of Chancery and Delaware Supreme Court with respect to a shareholder derivative action. The action was dismissed on the pleadings by the Court of Chancery, and that ruling was affirmed on appeal by the Delaware Supreme Court. See GAMCO Asset Mgmt. Inc. v. iHeartMedia Inc., 2016 WL 6892802 (Del. Ch. Nov. 23, 2016), aff’d 172 A.3d 884 (Del. 2017).
Briefed and argued a pending appeal on behalf of a criminal defendant whose trial transcript was lost, depriving him of the ability to appeal errors at his trial. See Bush v. Florida, No. 14-12532 (11th Cir. argued May 19, 2016).
Successfully represented AT&T before the Federal Communications Commission with respect to proposed regulations to “unbundle” set-top cable boxes. The Commission has not enacted the proposed regulations. See Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, In re Expanding Consumers’ Video Navigation Choices; Commercial Availability of Navigation Devices, FCC 16-18 (Feb. 18, 2016).
Successfully represented a law firm partner in an arbitration dispute against his former firm.
Comment, Federal Preemption of State Wage-and-Hour Claims, 76 U. Chi. L. Rev. 1251 (2009)
University of Chicago Law School, J.D., high honors, 2010
- Order of the Coif
- John M. Olin Law & Economics Fellow
- Kirkland & Ellis Scholar
- Executive Topics & Comments Editor, University of Chicago Law Review, 2009-2010
University of Illinois, B.S., summa cum laude, 2006
- Barry M. Goldwater Scholar
Law Clerk, Judge Gary Feinerman, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois, 2011-2012
Law Clerk, Judge Pamela Rymer, U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, 2010-2011