Daniel W. Wolff
Overview
Dan Wolff represents clients facing enterprise-level risks arising out of government enforcement actions and complex commercial disputes. He is a problem solver who understands how to use litigation, whether as plaintiff or defendant, to achieve exceptional business solutions and outcomes. Dan leads the firm’s administrative law litigation practice, counseling clients and litigating on their behalf in federal and state courts around the country in matters arising under the Administrative Procedure Act, other federal statutes, and the U.S. Constitution. He also litigates commercial disputes and matters arising in tort. He has deep experience arguing dispositive motions and appeals, in addition to trying jury cases. Notably, The National Law Journal named Dan a Political Activism and First Amendment Rights Trailblazer.
Career & Education
- University of Wisconsin, B.A., 1992
- University of Dayton School of Law, J.D., summa cum laude, 2001
- District of Columbia
- Ohio
- Supreme Court of the United States
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
- U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado
- U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
- U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland
- U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio
- U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
Daniel's Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 12.10.25
Federal Court Strikes Down Interior Order Suspending Wind Energy Development
On December 8, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts in State of New York v. Trump held unlawful and vacated the U.S. Department of the Interior’s “Wind Order” implementing President Trump’s January 20, 2025, “Temporary Withdrawal of All Areas on the Outer Continental Shelf From Offshore Wind Leasing and Review of the Federal Government’s Leasing and Permitting Practices for Wind Projects,” 90 Fed. Reg. 8363 (Wind Memo, discussed further in a prior alert). This lawsuit, brought by a coalition of states with Alliance for Clean Energy New York intervening on their behalf, challenges Interior’s implementation, through the Wind Order, of the Wind Memo’s direction to pause processing permits and other approvals necessary to onshore and offshore wind energy development. Notably, the lawsuit does not challenge the other element of the Wind Memo, which withdrew unleased offshore areas from future leasing under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA). (Note, even though the Wind Order indicates its effect is temporary, the Wind Memo instructs relevant agencies not to advance wind development projects until a “comprehensive assessment” is completed, and the district court’s order confirms that the affected agencies had no plans to restart permitting activities until that assessment was complete.)
Client Alert | 3 min read | 10.07.25
Blocking the Blocked Income Rules? Loper Bright’s influence over the Eighth Circuit’s 3M decision.
Press Coverage | 09.12.25
Representative Matters
Administrative Procedure Act / Constitutional Law / Appellate Litigation
- Dan is a veteran federal district court litigator against the United States. He has brought numerous actions on behalf of clients against Cabinet-level departments or their sub-agencies challenging agency actions and seeking injunctive and declaratory relief under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) or U.S. Constitution.
- Over the last several years, Dan has secured victories on summary judgment for clients in multiple U.S. District Courts in cases arising under the APA, other federal statutes, or the Constitution.
-
Dan has presented oral argument in more than a dozen cases before the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the D.C., Fourth, Seventh, Eighth, Tenth, Eleventh, and Federal Circuits. He has co-authored merits briefs in two cases before by the U.S. Supreme Court, both decided in favor of Crowell’s clients, as well as briefs filed in other federal circuit courts of appeals. He has also argued appellate matters in the state/local courts of the District of Columbia and Maryland.
- As part of his litigation practice, Dan represents clients as intervenors or amici in third-party APA litigation filed by or against federal agencies.
- Dan advises clients on rights and litigation strategies arising under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and litigates FOIA cases in the federal district courts.
Civil Litigation and Trials
- Dan litigates commercial and other civil cases on both the plaintiff and defense sides. He has represented clients in matters arising under breach of contract, fraud, products liability, and civil RICO.
- In 2022, Dan was part of a federal district court trial team that successfully defended a client that had been sued under federal statutory and state common law tort theories. Dan successfully argued the motion for summary judgment, knocking out the common law claims on federal preemption grounds. Following a week-long trial, the jury returned a verdict for Crowell’s client on the federal statutory claim.
- Dan has appeared in multiple state-court venues in cases arising under breach of contract and tort theories.
Compliance Counseling and Enforcement Defense
- In addition to his litigation practice, Dan counsels clients on compliance with workplace safety and health standards promulgated by the Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA). He also defends industry clients against citations and penalties issued by those agencies before administrative tribunals.
Daniel's Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 12.10.25
Federal Court Strikes Down Interior Order Suspending Wind Energy Development
On December 8, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts in State of New York v. Trump held unlawful and vacated the U.S. Department of the Interior’s “Wind Order” implementing President Trump’s January 20, 2025, “Temporary Withdrawal of All Areas on the Outer Continental Shelf From Offshore Wind Leasing and Review of the Federal Government’s Leasing and Permitting Practices for Wind Projects,” 90 Fed. Reg. 8363 (Wind Memo, discussed further in a prior alert). This lawsuit, brought by a coalition of states with Alliance for Clean Energy New York intervening on their behalf, challenges Interior’s implementation, through the Wind Order, of the Wind Memo’s direction to pause processing permits and other approvals necessary to onshore and offshore wind energy development. Notably, the lawsuit does not challenge the other element of the Wind Memo, which withdrew unleased offshore areas from future leasing under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA). (Note, even though the Wind Order indicates its effect is temporary, the Wind Memo instructs relevant agencies not to advance wind development projects until a “comprehensive assessment” is completed, and the district court’s order confirms that the affected agencies had no plans to restart permitting activities until that assessment was complete.)
Client Alert | 3 min read | 10.07.25
Blocking the Blocked Income Rules? Loper Bright’s influence over the Eighth Circuit’s 3M decision.
Press Coverage | 09.12.25
Insights
TEI Seattle
|12.10.24
Supreme Court Sharply Limits Environmental Impact Statements In Victory For Developers
|05.29.25
The Los Angeles Times
Will Legal Challenges From Small Businesses Actually End Trump's Tariffs?
|04.15.25
Forbes News Room
Meet the New Nationwide Injunction. Same as the Old Nationwide Injunction.
|08.01.25
Crowell & Moring’s Government Contracts Legal Forum
Not So Surprising: The Fifth Circuit Finds No Private Right of Action in the No Surprises Act
|07.18.25
Crowell & Moring's Health Law Blog
De Minimis to be Eliminated July 2027 under Recently Enacted Megabill
|07.08.25
Crowell & Moring’s International Trade Law
Global Trade Talks: Tariffs-IEEPA Litigation Update
|06.09.25
Crowell & Moring’s International Trade Law
Update on Parallel Federal Court Cases Enjoining IEEPA
|06.06.25
Crowell & Moring’s International Trade Law
District Court Denies Motion to Move Venue, Grants Preliminary Injunction
|05.29.25
Crowell & Moring’s International Trade Law
Court of International Trade Blocks IEEPA Tariffs
|05.28.25
Crowell & Moring’s International Trade Law
First Suit Against Trump IEEPA Tariffs Filed in Florida
|04.04.25
Crowell & Moring’s International Trade Law
OSHA Revises Exemption for 'Retail Facilities' from Its Process Safety Management Standard
|07.30.15
Crowell & Moring's Retail & Consumer Products Law Observer
Daniel's Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 12.10.25
Federal Court Strikes Down Interior Order Suspending Wind Energy Development
On December 8, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts in State of New York v. Trump held unlawful and vacated the U.S. Department of the Interior’s “Wind Order” implementing President Trump’s January 20, 2025, “Temporary Withdrawal of All Areas on the Outer Continental Shelf From Offshore Wind Leasing and Review of the Federal Government’s Leasing and Permitting Practices for Wind Projects,” 90 Fed. Reg. 8363 (Wind Memo, discussed further in a prior alert). This lawsuit, brought by a coalition of states with Alliance for Clean Energy New York intervening on their behalf, challenges Interior’s implementation, through the Wind Order, of the Wind Memo’s direction to pause processing permits and other approvals necessary to onshore and offshore wind energy development. Notably, the lawsuit does not challenge the other element of the Wind Memo, which withdrew unleased offshore areas from future leasing under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA). (Note, even though the Wind Order indicates its effect is temporary, the Wind Memo instructs relevant agencies not to advance wind development projects until a “comprehensive assessment” is completed, and the district court’s order confirms that the affected agencies had no plans to restart permitting activities until that assessment was complete.)
Client Alert | 3 min read | 10.07.25
Blocking the Blocked Income Rules? Loper Bright’s influence over the Eighth Circuit’s 3M decision.
Press Coverage | 09.12.25




