Matthew L. Mustokoff


  • Wesleyan University
    B.A. 1997, Phi Beta Kappa
  • Temple University Beasley School of Law
    J.D. 2000, Articles editor of the Temple Political and Civil Rights Law Review; Raynes McCarty Graduation Prize for scholarly achievement in the law
  • New York
  • Pennsylvania
  • USDC, District of Colorado
  • USDC, Southern District of New York
  • USDC, Eastern District of New York
  • USDC, Eastern District of Pennsylvania
  • USDC, Eastern District of Arkansas
  • USDC, Western District of Arkansas
  • USCA, Second Circuit
  • USCA, Third Circuit
  • USCA, Eighth Circuit
  • USCA, Eleventh Circuit
  • USCA, Federal Circuit

Matthew L. Mustokoff, a partner of the Firm, is an accomplished securities and corporate governance litigator.  He has represented clients at the trial and appellate level in numerous high-profile cases involving a wide array of matters, including financial fraud, market manipulation, corporate takeovers, unfair trade practices, and patent infringement. 

Matt has litigated several nationwide securities cases on behalf of U.S. and overseas investors.  He played a major role in prosecuting In re Citigroup Bond Litigation (S.D.N.Y.), involving allegations that Citigroup concealed its exposure to subprime mortgage debt on the eve of the 2008 financial crisis.  The $730 million settlement marks the second largest recovery ever in a Securities Act class action brought on behalf of corporate bondholders.  Matt represented the shareholder class in In re Pfizer Securities Litigation (S.D.N.Y.), a twelve-year fraud case alleging that Pfizer concealed adverse clinical results for its pain drugs Celebrex and Bextra.  The case settled for $486 million following a victory at the Second Circuit Court of Appeals reversing the district court’s dismissal of the action on the eve of trial.  Matt also served as class counsel in In re JPMorgan Chase Securities Litigation (S.D.N.Y.), arising out of the “London Whale” derivatives trading scandal.  The case resulted in a $150 million recovery. 

In Connecticut Retirement Plans v. BP plc (S.D. Tex.), a fraud case stemming from the 2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, Matt successfully argued the opposition to BP’s motion to dismiss, resulting in a landmark decision sustaining fraud claims under English law for investors on the London Stock Exchange—the first in a U.S. court.  He served as lead counsel to several prominent mutual funds as opt-out plaintiffs in securities fraud actions in Manhattan federal court against Brazil’s state-run oil company, Petrobras, arising out of a decade-long bid-rigging scheme, the largest corruption scandal in Brazil’s history.  Matt’s significant courtroom experience includes serving as one of the lead trial lawyers for shareholders in the only securities fraud class action arising out of the financial crisis to be tried to jury verdict. 

Prior to joining the Firm, Matt practiced at Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP in New York where he represented public companies and financial institutions in SEC enforcement and white collar criminal matters, shareholder litigation and contested bankruptcy proceedings. 

A frequent speaker and writer on securities and corporate law issues, Matt’s publications have been cited in more than 75 law review articles and treatises.  Most recently, he authored  “Loss Causation on Trial in Rule 10b-5 Litigation a Decade After Dura,” Rutgers University Law Review (Winter 2017 publication forthcoming).  Matt has lectured at the Benjamin Cardozo School of Law and before the Israel Securities Authority.  He has been a featured panelist at the American Bar Association’s Section of Litigation Annual Conference and NERA Economic Consulting’s Securities and Finance Seminar.  Since 2010, Matt has served as the Co-Chair of the ABA Subcommittee on Securities Class Actions.

Ongoing Cases
  • In a multi-district litigation stemming from the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil-rig explosion in the Gulf of Mexico, we represent seven public pension funds that purchased BP securities on the London Stock Exchange. Our clients allege that BP misrepresented its compliance with safety protocols and concealed the true extent of the oil spill following the explosion. We successfully opposed BP’s motion to dismiss, obtaining a landmark decision that allows our clients to pursue English law fraud claims in Texas federal court. The ruling was the first by a U.S. court to uphold foreign law securities fraud claims following the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Morrison v. National Australia Bank which limited the reach of the federal securities laws to U.S. transactions.  

Representative Outcomes
  • This shareholder derivative action challenged a conflicted “roll up” REIT transaction orchestrated by Glade M. Knight and his son Justin Knight.

    The proposed transaction paid the Knights millions of dollars while paying public stockholders less than they had invested in the company. The case was brought under Virginia law, and settled just ten days before trial, with stockholders receiving an additional $32 million in merger consideration.

  • Represented the Miami Beach Employees’ Retirement Plan, the City of Tallahassee Pension Plan, the Philadelphia Public Employees Retirement System and the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority Pension Fund in pursuing claims against Citigroup for concealing its exposure to subprime mortgage debt—exposure that, once revealed, led to massive investment losses during the 2008 financial crisis. 

    Investors’ claims resulted in a historic settlement of $730 million, the second largest recovery ever under Section 11 of the Securities Act.   

  • Court-appointed Co-Lead Counsel, Kessler Topaz, has negotiated a $150 million cash settlement on behalf of a certified class of investors with defendant JPMorgan Chase & Co. (“JPMorgan”).  The settlement resolves claims arising out of the 2012 trading and risk management activities of JPMorgan’s Chief Investment Office (“CIO”) and its so-called “London Whale” trades.

    The case was initially filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York in July 2012.  In August 2012, the Court appointed Kessler Topaz, along with two other law firms, to serve as Lead Counsel in the action.  In November 2012, Kessler Topaz filed a Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint on behalf of the Lead Plaintiffs, including its client, Sjunde AP-Fonden or AP7, and the putative class of JPMorgan investors.  Following investigations by various governmental entities, including the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of the U.S. Senate, Kessler Topaz amended the operative complaint by filing a Second Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint in April 2013 (“Complaint”). 

    The Complaint asserted claims pursuant to Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder against JPMorgan and certain of its officers during the relevant period.  The Complaint alleged that defendants violated the federal securities laws by issuing false and misleading statements regarding the activities of the CIO and the extent of the risk posed by the London Whale trades within the CIO’s synthetic credit portfolio.  Specifically, the Complaint alleged that on April 13, 2012, when defendants characterized the London Whale trading as customary “hedging” activity, they knew or recklessly disregarded that the London Whale trades were undisclosed, high-risk proprietary trades.  Furthermore, the Complaint alleged that when analysts began expressing concern over the London Whale trading activities, JPMorgan CEO James Dimon fraudulently dismissed them as a "complete tempest in a teapot."  The alleged false and misleading statements caused the price of JPMorgan common stock to be artificially inflated during the Class Period and when it was disclosed in May 2012 that the London Whale trades had lost over $2 billion, the price of the stock declined significantly, causing damage to investors.

    Following more than three years of hard-fought litigation, including the Court’s certification of a class of investors, the parties agreed to mediate the case before the Honorable Daniel H. Weinstein (ret.).  The mediation process, which commenced in June 2015, was successful and culminated in the settlement, which was approved by the Court on May 10, 2016. 

    Additional information concerning the settlement can be found at

Speaking Engagements

Matt has lectured and appeared on speaking panels in the United States and Europe on a variety of topics, including corporate governance, internal investigations, class certification and damages in securities cases, opt-out shareholder litigation, and securities enforcement trends.  Recent engagements include:

“Recent Developments in Securities Class Actions:  Class Certification After Halliburton II,” NERA Economic Consulting’s 16th Securities and Finance Summer Seminar, Park City, Utah, July 4, 2016

“The Petrobras Litigation:  A Case Study in Political Scandal, Cartelism and Financial Fraud,” The Rights and Responsibilities of Institutional Investors Conference, Amsterdam, March 10, 2016

“Are the Courtroom Doors Closing to U.S. Investors?  Erosions in Shareholders’ Rights and What Investors Can Do to Reverse the Trend,” Fifth Annual Evolving Fiduciary Obligations of Pension Plans Seminar, Washington, D.C., February 18, 2014

“Delaware Deal Litigation:  The Plaintiff’s Perspective,” Benjamin Cardozo School of Law, Corporate Governance Seminar, New York, December 7, 2010 

“Conducting Internal Investigations and Making Voluntary Disclosures:  Is it Worth the Risk?,” 2010 American Bar Association Section of Litigation Annual Conference, New York, April 22, 2010

“Opting Out of the Petrobras Class Action,” Institutional Investors Forum, Washington D.C., October 27, 2016


"Damages and Predominance in Securities Class Actions After Comcast," Review of Securities & Commodities Regulation (June 2015)

"Foreign Law Securities Fraud Claims in U.S. Courts After Morrison,” ABA Securities Litigation Journal (Winter 2014)

“Proving Securities Fraud Damages at Trial,” Review of Securities & Commodities Regulation (June 2013) 

“Is Item 303 Liability Under the Securities Act Becoming a ‘Trend’?,” ABA Securities Litigation Journal (Summer 2012) 

“The Maintenance Theory of Inflation in Fraud-on-the-Market Cases,” Securities Regulation Law Journal (Spring 2012) 

“Statistical Significance, Materiality, and the Duty to Disclose,” ABA Securities Litigation Journal (Fall 2010) 

“Delaware and Insider Trading: The Chancery Court Rejects Federal Preemption Arguments of Corporate Directors,” Securities Regulation Law Journal (Summer 2010) 

“The Pitfalls of Waiver in Corporate Prosecutions: Sharing Work Product with the Government,” Securities Regulation Law Journal (Fall 2009) 

“Fraud Not on the Market: Rebutting the Presumption of Reliance Twenty Years After Basic Inc. v. Levinson,” Hastings Business Law Journal (Spring 2008) 

“Scheme Liability Under Rule 10b-5: The New Battleground in Securities Fraud Litigation,” The Federal Lawyer (June 2006) 

"Proving Scienter in SEC Aiding and Abetting Cases," Insights: The Corporate & Securities Law Advisor (May 2006) 

“Sovereign Immunity and the Crisis of Constitutional Absolutism: Interpreting the Eleventh Amendment After Alden v. Maine,” Maine Law Review (2001)

  “Loss Causation on Trial in Rule 10b-5 Litigation a Decade After Dura,” Rutgers University Law Review (publication forthcoming, Winter 2017)


Benchmark Litigation Stars, 2020 

Lawdragon 500 Leading Plaintiff Financial Lawyer, 2019

Community Involvement

Co-Chair, American Bar Association Subcommittee on Securities Class Actions and Derivative Litigation (2011-present); Co-Chair, American Bar Association Subcommittee on Internal Investigations and Corporate Prosecutions (2009-2010)