Jennifer L. Joost


  • Washington University in St. Louis
    B.A.-History 2003
  • Temple University Beasley School of Law
    J.D. 2006, cum laude, Special Projects Editor, Temple International and Comparative Law Journal (2005-2006)
  • Pennsylvania
  • California
  • USDC, Eastern District of Pennsylvania
  • USDC, Northern District of California
  • USCA, Second Circuit
  • USCA, Fourth Circuit
  • USCA, Ninth Circuit

Jennifer L. Joost, a partner of the Firm, concentrates her practice in the area of securities litigation. Jennifer began her legal career at the Firm in May of 2005, working first as a summer associate and a law clerk during her final year of law school, before starting as a full-time associate in August of 2006.   

Jennifer has represented individual and institutional investors in a variety of securities class actions in which the Firm has served as Lead or Co-Lead Counsel, including some of the largest federal securities class actions to arise out of the recent financial crisis. Jennifer has been involved in all aspects of pre-trial proceedings, including drafting pleadings, litigating motions to dismiss and for summary judgment, conducting extensive document and deposition discovery, with a focus on navigating complex electronic discovery issues that oftentimes arise in large-scale, multi-year securities class actions. Jennifer also has presented oral argument in opposition to several motions to dismiss and has been actively involved in several appeals. In her practice, Jennifer works with many types of investors, including individuals and pension funds, utilizing the remedies afforded by the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, among others, on their behalf to recover losses and promote corporate accountability. 

Representative Outcomes
  • This securities fraud class action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York stemmed from the “London Whale” derivatives trading scandal at JPMorgan Chase. Shareholders alleged that JPMorgan concealed the high-risk, proprietary trading activities of the investment bank’s Chief Investment Office, including the highly volatile, synthetic credit portfolio linked to trader Bruno Iksil—a.k.a., the “London Whale”—which caused a $6.2 billion loss in a matter of weeks. Shareholders accused JPMorgan of falsely downplaying media reports of the synthetic portfolio, including on an April 2012 conference call when JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon dismissed these reports as a “tempest in a teapot,” when in fact, the portfolio’s losses were swelling as a result of the bank’s failed oversight. 

    This case was resolved in 2015 for $150 million, following U.S. District Judge George B. Daniels’ order certifying the class, representing a significant victory for investors.

  • Obtained a $2.4 billion settlement in litigation against Bank of America (BoA) relating to its merger with Merrill Lynch & Co. (Merrill). Our clients, Dutch National pension fund PGGM and Swedish National pension fund AP4, alleged that BoA gave shareholders false and misleading information about Merrill’s financial condition and obligations prior to a key vote on the merger. 

    The settlement, which included an undertaking to improve corporate governance policies, was the 6th-largest ever in a securities class action and the largest so far to come out of the subprime meltdown and credit crisis.

  • 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.   

  • As co-lead counsel representing the Maine Public Employees’ Retirement System, secured a $500 million settlement for a class of plaintiffs that purchased mortgage-backed securities (MBS) issued by Countrywide Financial Corporation (Countrywide).

    Plaintiffs alleged that Countrywide and various of its subsidiaries, officers and investment banks made false and misleading statements in more than 450 prospectus supplements relating to the issuance of subprime and Alt-A MBS—in particular, the quality of the underlying loans. When information about the loans became public, the plaintiffs’ investments declined in value. The ensuing six-year litigation raised several issues of first impression in the Ninth Circuit.

  • Represented Danish mutual fund manager Danske Invest A/S and Westmoreland County Employees’ Retirement System as co-lead counsel in an class action alleging that Medtronic and its senior officers failed to disclose the company’s reliance on illegal “off-label” marketing techniques to drive sales of its INFUSE Bone Graft medical device.

    As a result of the illegal marketing practices, Medtronic became the target of a federal government investigation. Stock prices plummeted when Medtronic’s CEO reported that the company had received a U.S. Department of Justice subpoena, significantly impacting the value of the plaintiff’s stock. After hard-fought discovery and class certification battles, Medtronic agreed to pay shareholders $85 million. 


Victory for Plaintiffs As Countrywide MBS Case Sent Back to State Court, Fall 2011 KTMC Client Newsletter


Lawdragon 500 Leading Plaintiff Financial Lawyer, 2019, 2020

Northern California Super Lawyers – Rising Star for 2016 and 2017

Pennsylvania Super Lawyers – Rising Stars (2010, 2011, 2013, 2014)