Peter Davis represents a full spectrum of clients in high-stakes appellate litigation across the country.

Peter's practice encompasses a broad range of civil matters, primarily focused in appellate courts. He has drafted briefs in the First, Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Seventh, Eighth, and Ninth, and D.C. Circuits. He also has considerable experience in state courts, representing clients in the California, New York, Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana, and Missouri appellate courts. His cases span a range of subject areas, including:

  • Administrative Law
  • Antitrust
  • Securities
  • Class Action procedure
  • Technology

He has particular experience representing clients in government enforcement cases, including matters raising complex constitutional issues. He has argued appeals before the California Court of Appeal and the New York Appellate Division.

Peter coordinates national appellate strategy for Netflix in a set of class action cases brought by local governments seeking to impose a 5% cable franchise fee on Netflix’s streaming service. His work has contributed to nine appellate victories within the past three years, including a recent win in a case he argued before the California Court of Appeal.

Peter helps clients pursue opportunities for early appellate review, including by interlocutory appeal or extraordinary writ. He has successfully represented clients petitioning for interlocutory review in both federal and state appellate courts, and successfully obtained a writ of mandamus from a state appellate court. He also works with clients to develop arguments in trial court proceedings.

Before joining Latham, Peter served as a law clerk to Justice Elena Kagan of the Supreme Court of the United States, Chief Judge Sri Srinivasan of the US Court of Appeals for the Washington, D.C. Circuit, and Chief Judge James E. Boasberg of the US District Court for the District of Columbia.

Peter graduated from Stanford Law School, where he participated in the Supreme Court Litigation Clinic.

Peter maintains an active pro bono practice, focused on civil rights and criminal justice. 

Select Appellate Experience

Peter has successfully represented Netflix in securing dismissal of cases seeking to impose cable franchise fees:

  • City of Lancaster v. Netflix, Inc., 99 Cal. App. 5th 1093 (2024) (argued)
  • Borough of Longport v. Netflix, Inc., 94 F.4th 303 (3d Cir. 2024)  
  • In re Disney DTC, Hulu LLC, Netflix, Inc., No. 05-23-00485-CV, 2024 WL 358117 (Tex. App.-Dallas Jan. 31, 2024) (writ of mandamus granted)
  • City of E. St. Louis v. Netflix, Inc., 83 F.4th 1066 (7th Cir. 2023) 
  • City of Kenner v. Netflix, Inc., 366 So. 3d 642 (La. Ct. App. 2023)
  • Gwinnett County v. Netflix, Inc., 885 S.E.2d 177 (Ga. Ct. App. 2023)
  • City of Ashdown v. Netflix, Inc., 52 F.4th 1025 (8th Cir. 2022)
  • City of Reno v. Netflix, Inc., 52 F.4th 874 (9th Cir. 2022)

Peter also represents clients in complex antitrust cases in trial and appellate courts. Select experience includes:

  • American Airlines in connection with government enforcement action challenging Northeast Alliance joint venture in the First Circuit and U.S. Supreme Court (cert. petition pending)
  • Apple in connection with Google Search monopolization enforcement litigation and private conspiracy lawsuits
  • Leading fashion designer in defending against tying and unfair competition claims
  • Century-old non-profit corporation in defending tying claims
  • Leading home improvement company in obtaining interlocutory reversal of Daubert decision in price-fixing MDL
  • Counsel of record for preeminent antitrust scholars Herbert Hovenkamp and Daniel Crane in amicus brief supporting petition for writ of certiorari in Duke Energy Carolinas v. NTE Carolinas, No. 24-917 (U.S. Supreme Court).

Other appellate experience includes:

  • Leading telecommunications company in seeking Supreme Court review of landmark copyright infringement case
  • Drug manufacturer in defending FDA’s approval under Orphan Drug Act
  • Medical services company in Ninth Circuit appeal raising First Amendment challenge to California law
  • Netflix in anti-SLAPP appeals in the Ninth Circuit and California Court of Appeal
  • U.S. Chamber of Commerce in connection with certiorari- and merits-stage amicus briefs in Starbucks, Inc. v. McKinney, No 23-367 (U.S. Supreme Court)
  • Nat’l Assoc. of Wheat Growers v. Bonta, 85 F.4th 1263 (9th Cir. 2023) (holding that California Prop 65 warning for glyphosate violated First Amendment)
  • IAM Nat’l Pension Fund v. Farfetch Ltd., 2023 WL 2879304 (2d Cir. Apr. 11, 2023) (affirming dismissal of securities class action complaint)

Bar Qualification

  • California
  • District of Columbia

Education

  • JD, Stanford Law School
    Urban A. Sontheimer Third-Year Honor
  • BA in International Relations & International Security Studies, Stanford University
Digital Media concept Wall of screens smart TV
October 20, 2023 Recognition

Litigator of the Week Runners-Up and Shout Outs

Latham litigators recognized for a Seventh Circuit win for Netflix upholding a win for streaming services finding that East St. Louis, Illinois, can’t force them to pay franchise fees imposed on cable companies.