Photo of Daniel Esses

Daniel Esses

Dan Esses is a commercial litigator helping leading companies in the technology and entertainment industries in high-stakes disputes. His experience includes all stages of complex civil litigation, including appeals, in both federal and state courts. Trained as a classicist and philosopher, Dan applies his love of language, interpretive skill, and analytical rigor to his practice. He was born in Buenos Aires, Argentina and is a native Spanish speaker.

Dan’s pro bono practice includes collaborating with civil-rights organizations in impact litigation as well as direct services for individual clients.

Before joining the firm, Dan clerked for the Honorable Leondra R. Kruger of the Supreme Court of California and the Honorable Josephine L. Staton of the United States District Court for the Central District of California.

Contact:Read more about Daniel EssesEmail

A divided Ninth Circuit panel recently affirmed a district court’s denial of class certification based on a lack of predominance.  See Ambrosio v. Progressive Preferred Ins. Co., 2025 WL 2628179 (9th Cir. Sept. 12, 2025).  The plaintiffs sought to represent a class of drivers asserting breach-of-contract and other related claims against an auto insurer.  The drivers alleged the insurer’s use of a “projected sold adjustment” (“PSA”) to calculate the market value of insured drivers’ vehicles after a total loss led the insurer to uniformly underestimate vehicle value, which they contended violated the terms of their insurance policies.  Agreeing with the district court’s reasoning, the Ninth Circuit held that, because the insurer’s use of the PSA did not by itself violate the terms of the policies, each plaintiff would need to adduce individual evidence to prove that the PSA had caused them measurable damages—an essential element of a claim for breach of contract under Arizona law. Continue Reading Ninth Circuit Affirms Denial of Class Certification Finding Lack of Predominance