1. Home
  2. |Professionals
  3. |Daniella A. Schmidt

Daniella A. Schmidt

Counsel | She/Her
Counsel | She/Her
ZHNjaG1pZHRAY3Jvd2VsbC5jb20=
VCard
VCard

Areas of Focus

Overview

Daniella Schmidt focuses her practice on employment discrimination disputes. In that capacity, Daniella represents an over five-thousand member plaintiff class in the remedial phase of a Title VII class action. In addition to her work at Crowell, Daniella is an adjunct professor of law at Fordham University School of Law where she teaches Legal Writing and Research to 1L law students.

Prior to joining the firm, Daniella’s practice focused on a wide variety of commercial litigation matters, white-collar investigations and regulatory defense matters for high-profile clients across a variety of industries. Daniella has advised clients on a number of topics including securities fraud, anti-trust laws, contract disputes, employment matters, first amendment law, and complex commercial transactions.

Daniella’s background includes robust public service and pro bono work. She served as a Senior Attorney at the Brooklyn Defender Services on behalf of parents against unreasonable state intervention, where she focused, in part, on the organization's pro bono partnerships and was a member of the Early Defense Team and the attorney litigation training team. Her pro bono practice focuses on LGBTQ rights, gun violence, human rights, workers’ rights and women’s rights, immigration and asylum hearings, and family defense work.

Career & Education

  • Professional Activities and Memberships

    • Lecturer in Law, Legal Practice Workshop, Columbia Law School

    • Adjunct Professor of Law, Legal Writing and Research, Fordham Law School

    Professional Activities and Memberships

    • Lecturer in Law, Legal Practice Workshop, Columbia Law School

    • Adjunct Professor of Law, Legal Writing and Research, Fordham Law School

    • University of Michigan Law School, J.D., magna cum laude, 2013
    • Wesleyan University, B.A., Honors, Phi Beta Kappa, 2007
    • University of Michigan Law School, J.D., magna cum laude, 2013
    • Wesleyan University, B.A., Honors, Phi Beta Kappa, 2007

    • New York
    • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York
    • U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
    • New York
    • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York
    • U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York

    • Law Clerk to the Honorable Judge Victor Marrero, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
    • Law Clerk to the Honorable Judge Victor Marrero, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York

  • Professional Activities and Memberships

    • Chair, Brooklyn Defender Services Family Defense Practice Associate Advisory Board, 2022-Present

    Professional Activities and Memberships

    • Chair, Brooklyn Defender Services Family Defense Practice Associate Advisory Board, 2022-Present

    • Hebrew
    • Hebrew

Daniella's Insights

Client Alert | 6 min read | 10.24.25

Will Jarkesy Stop the IRS from Asserting Penalties Against Taxpayers?

In 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that the civil penalties issued by the SEC against individuals for committing securities fraud were unconstitutional because they were levied without a jury trial.[1]...

View All Insights

Insights

Client Alert | 6 min read | 10.24.25

Will Jarkesy Stop the IRS from Asserting Penalties Against Taxpayers?

Client Alert | 3 min read | 10.15.25

Developers Adapt Timelines and Strategies for Wind and Solar Projects Following Recent IRS Guidance and Expected IRS Enforcement Activity

Client Alert | 3 min read | 10.10.25

New Post Appeals Mediation Pilot Program

Firm News | 2 min read | 07.09.25

Amica Center Honors Crowell & Moring with Defenders of Due Process Award

View All Insights

Practices

Daniella's Insights

Client Alert | 6 min read | 10.24.25

Will Jarkesy Stop the IRS from Asserting Penalties Against Taxpayers?

In 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that the civil penalties issued by the SEC against individuals for committing securities fraud were unconstitutional because they were levied without a jury trial.[1]...

View All Insights