Danyll W. Foix

Partner

Washington, D.C.
T +1.202.861.1596
F +1.202.861.1783

Overview

Dan Foix advises clients on a range of antitrust issues and represents clients in commercial disputes, with a particular focus on antitrust litigation, class actions, and investigations. He routinely counsels clients on matters ranging from antitrust questions that arise during day-to-day business operations to strategic marketing initiatives and pricing regimes. Dan also represents clients in commercial disputes, particularly antitrust litigation and class actions. He has provided vigorous representation of large companies defending antitrust claims brought as individual and class action cases. He also has helped clients bring antitrust claims as plaintiffs, recovering more than $400 million in settlements for clients in recent years. In addition, Dan represents clients in merger and other investigations by antitrust enforcement authorities such as the Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission. He has guided clients through investigations, helping reach resolutions that make business sense.

Dan is the editor of BakerHostetler's Antitrust Advocate blog for which he is a regular contributor, and he also publishes and presents on best practices and developments in the antitrust and class action sectors. His antitrust experience and client representation has been recognized by leading attorney directories, including being “recommended” for antitrust-civil litigation/class actions by The Legal 500 (2017) and being selected as a “top rated antitrust litigation lawyer” by Super Lawyers (2017).

Select Experience

  • Served as one of the trial counsel to a global engineering company in an indemnity case arising out of a food manufacturing plant explosion. After a four-week trial, a Nebraska jury returned a verdict of $108.9 million in favor of the client, twice the amount of the largest verdict in the jurisdiction at that time. This result was recognized by the National Law Journal as a “Top 50 Verdict” of 2016 in its Elite Trial Lawyers report.*
  • One of the principal attorneys representing a certified class of dairy farmers in an action alleging large dairy processors, a cooperative and others unlawfully conspired to eliminate competition for the marketing, sale and purchase of raw milk in 14 southeastern states. The litigation recovered more than $300 million, plus non-monetary relief, for the clients and class.*
  • Member of a team representing a large global manufacturing client, providing advice as well as representation during any litigation that may arise. Has served as a key team member in state and federal court litigation involving antitrust, dealer termination, breach of contract, and fraud claims.

* Does not guarantee similar results in comparable matters.

More »

Experience

  • Served as one of the trial counsel to a global engineering company in an indemnity case arising out of a food manufacturing plant explosion. After a four-week trial, a Nebraska jury returned a verdict of $108.9 million in favor of the client, twice the amount of the largest verdict in the jurisdiction at that time. This result was recognized by the National Law Journal as a “Top 50 Verdict” of 2016 in its Elite Trial Lawyers report.*
  • One of the principal attorneys representing a certified class of dairy farmers in an action alleging large dairy processors, a cooperative and others unlawfully conspired to eliminate competition for the marketing, sale and purchase of raw milk in 14 southeastern states. The litigation recovered more than $300 million, plus non-monetary relief, for the clients and class.*
  • Member of a team representing a large global manufacturing client, providing advice as well as representation during any litigation that may arise. Has served as a key team member in state and federal court litigation involving antitrust, dealer termination, breach of contract, and fraud claims.
  • One of the principal attorneys representing a certified class of dairy farmers in an action alleging an unlawful conspiracy to eliminate competition for the marketing, sale and purchase of raw milk in the Northeast in violation of sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act. Settlements totaling $80 million, plus non-monetary relief, have been obtained on behalf of the clients and class.*
  • Represented a food company in a hostile dispute with a rival corporation over the misappropriation of product packaging trade secrets. The three-year matter was resolved via settlement of all claims reached on the eve of trial.
  • Represented a global news company in a Department of Justice investigation of a proposed merger. The client received clearance following an intensive, expedited second request for information.
  • Represented a group of insurance companies and individuals in a Department of Justice investigation of alleged anticompetitive pricing practices. The investigation closed following limited discovery, with no action taken by the government.
  • Represented an international oil company in an investigation of a potential price-fixing claim against a service provider. The matter was later settled.  
  • Represented a food and beverage company in a Federal Trade Commission investigation of a proposed acquisition. Obtained acquisition clearance.
  • Represented a class of tobacco growers in price-fixing actions against tobacco dealers and cigarette manufacturers. Recovered funds for the clients in a series of settlements after extensive litigation, with a remaining defendant settling at trial.

* Does not guarantee similar results in comparable matters.

Recognitions and Memberships

Recognitions

      • The Legal 500 United States (2014, 2017 to 2018)

        • Recommended in Antitrust - Civil Litigation/Class Actions: Defense
  • Washington, D.C. "Super Lawyer" (2014 to 2017)
  • National Law Journal "Elite Trial Lawyer" Report: Top 50 Verdict (2016)

Memberships

  • American Bar Association
    • Section of Antitrust Law
    • Section of Litigation

Publications

Articles

Admissions

  • U.S. District Court, District of Columbia
  • U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit
  • District of Columbia
  • Minnesota

Education

  • J.D., University of Minnesota Law School, 1998, Journal of Law & Inequality, Managing Editor (1997-98) and Staff Editor (1996-97)
  • B.A., University of Minnesota, 1995

Blog

In The Blogs

Previous Next
Antitrust Advocate
Carl Hittinger, Jeanne-Michele Mariani Examine Drug Price Spikes and Antitrust Laws
By Carl W. Hittinger, Jeanne-Michele Mariani
December 18, 2018
Partner Carl Hittinger and Associate Jeanne-Michele Mariani authored an article published by The Legal Intelligencer on Nov. 30, 2018. The article, “Price Hikes and Spikes and the Antitrust Laws,” uses the well-known example of “Pharma...
Read More ->
Antitrust Advocate
Carl Hittinger, Jeanne-Michele Mariani Assess Justice Kavanaugh's Testimony Regarding Antitrust Law
By Carl W. Hittinger, Jeanne-Michele Mariani
November 13, 2018
Partner Carl Hittinger and Associate Jeanne-Michele Mariani authored an article published Oct. 26, 2018, by The Legal Intelligencer. The article, “Justice Kavanaugh’s Antitrust Testimony Before the Senate Judiciary Committee,” examines the...
Read More ->
Antitrust Advocate
A Look at Judge Kavanaugh's Antitrust Record
By Tyson Y. Herrold, Carl W. Hittinger
September 10, 2018
BakerHostetler Partner Carl Hittinger and Associate Tyson Herrold authored an article published Aug. 24, 2018, by The Legal Intelligencer. The article, “Is Judge Kavanaugh a Fan of Antitrust Laws? Let’s Take a Look,” examines the limited...
Read More ->
Antitrust Advocate
Update: Section 1 Challenge to Jimmy John's No-Poach Agreement Survives Motion to Dismiss
By William DeVinney
August 8, 2018
We recently wrote that the Department of Justice’s and the Federal Trade Commission’s announcements condemning no-poaching agreements have sparked civil class actions, including a putative class action against Jimmy John’s. Butler v. Jimmy...
Read More ->
Antitrust Advocate
Did You Know the ‘Plausibility' Standard Can Be Used for More Than Pleading Antitrust Claims?
By Danyll W. Foix
June 26, 2018
Partners Robert Abrams, Gregory Commins, and Danyll Foix authored an article published in the Global Competition Review’s “The Antitrust Review of the Americas 2018.” Their article reviews how the “plausibility” pleading standard announced...
Read More ->