Daniel Wall is an experienced trial attorney who practices in the area of litigation. Prior to joining Duane Morris, Mr. Wall served as a trial attorney for the Santa Clara County Office of the Public Defender. Mr. Wall has represented thousands of clients through all forms of legal proceedings including arraignments, pretrial motions, evidentiary hearings, jury trials, dispositions and sentencings.
Mr. Wall is a 2016 graduate of Santa Clara University School of Law, where he currently serves as a board member and Executive Council to SCU Law’s Social Justice Advisory Board. During law school, Mr. Wall worked for the Northern California Innocence Project and served as a judicial extern to Hon. Edward Davila of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.
Mr. Wall is a native of the San Francisco Bay Area. He is a member of The Guardsmen, a charitable organization benefiting Northern California at-risk youth, and serves as Counsel for The Guardsmen Board of Directors.
Mr. Wall is an All-American swimmer, two-time ACC Champion, and graduate of the University of Virginia.
- U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
- U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
- U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California
- U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California
- Santa Clara University School of Law, J.D., 2016
- University of Virginia, B.A., 2012
- Duane Morris LLP
- Associate, 2023-present
- Santa Clara County, Office of the Public Defender
- Trial Attorney, 2016-2023
Civic and Charitable Activities
The Guardsmen of San Francisco
Represent the Judicial Council of California, as well as several superior courts, judges and court executives, in statewide litigation involving criminal justice reforms. Successfully defended the Los Angeles Superior Court and its presiding judge in defeating two identical putative class actions raising constitutional challenges on behalf of criminal defendants being held pretrial on bail they could not afford. The Central District of California judge dismissed the cases, citing the Eleventh Amendment and judicial immunity; the Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissals in a precedential opinion, holding that “Eleventh Amendment immunity is a threshold jurisdictional issue, and [federal courts] have no power to resolve claims brought against state courts or state court judges acting in a judicial capacity.”