Mike Daly has spent two decades defending, counseling, and championing clients that interact with consumers. His practice focuses on defending class actions, handling critical motions and appeals, and maximizing the defensibility of marketing and enforceability of contracts. He is known for his unflagging focus on his clients; he makes it his business to know their business, to recognize risks before they do, and to find the most practical solutions to their most intractable problems. An authority on aggregate litigation, Mike often speaks and writes about developments in the law. He defends claims challenging marketing, labeling, billing, credit reporting, and debt collecting, and counsels clients on removing actions, compelling arbitration, opposing certification, and negotiating settlements. He co-chairs two ABA subcommittees on class actions and is the senior editor of the firm’s TCPA Blog — one of the first and foremost public resources analyzing TCPA litigation and regulation.Mike writes with a singular clarity of language and purpose. He knows that the best briefs make confusing things clear, not clear things confusing. His goal for every engagement is to tailor the argument to the audience and to explain — as simply and succinctly as possible — why his client is right as a matter of not only fact and law but also policy and equity. He has drafted and consulted on critical briefing at all stages of adversarial and administrative matters, including on behalf of trade associations and public interest groups appearing as amicus curiae, and has taught a firmwide class on persuasive writing for more than a decade.Mike is known for championing civil rights and civil justice. His public interest work has protected the rights of the disabled and incarcerated, and prevented the misuse of our laws and courts. One matter challenged Pennsylvania’s use of voting machines that did not produce voter-verified physical records, which the Governor subsequently required for all machines. Another ended decades of discrimination by agencies that had refused to make information about public benefits programs available in formats that could be accessed by the visually impaired. Another convinced a state supreme court — with an amicus brief that made a novel statutory construction argument — that a consumer protection statute cannot be invoked by predatory professional plaintiffs who have suffered no harm. And a pending matter challenges the conditions in a federal detention center where immigrants are being exposed to an unacceptable risk of contracting COVID-19.