David P. Thoreson

David thrives in complex litigation and class action cases, with experience across a range of legal areas including appellate, copyright, corporate governance, administrative, employment and complex commercial disputes. He has assisted clients at both the trial and appellate levels, and his work spans drafting dispositive motions, preparing witnesses and managing discovery in federal and state courts.

David previously practiced in California, where he represented a diverse array of clients in complex litigation. He represented a major investment advisor in confidential arbitration, securing a complete victory for his client. David also helped defend a major semiconductor manufacturer in a high-stakes IP dispute, leading to the dismissal of key claims against his client. He has also represented multiple institutions of higher education in administrative proceedings resulting in favorable judicial orders and settlements.

In addition, David maintains a robust pro bono practice focused on public education and constitutional law. Most recently, David authored the supporting briefs, argued, and won a motion for summary judgment on behalf of two associations of Missouri librarians challenging the constitutionality of a state statute criminalizing Missouri educators’ provision of constitutionally protected literature to elementary or secondary school students. David’s briefing and argument resulted in a declaratory judgment that the statute was unconstitutionally vague and overbroad in violation of the Missouri Constitution’s due process and free speech clauses, as well as a permanent injunction barring the enforcement of the statute. Previously, David represented a major civil rights organization and a coalition of public-school districts, parents and children successfully challenging a federal Department of Education rule that sought to redirect federal pandemic funds from public to private schools, resulting in a nationwide injunction and a substantial settlement. David also represented a group of more than fifty Fourth Amendment scholars as amici curiae at both the certiorari and merits stages of litigation before the United States Supreme Court in a case defining the constitutional scope of Fourth Amendment seizures.