Jeff Hammel, Global Co-Chair of Latham's Securities Litigation & Professional Liability Practice, is "one of the nation's leading securities litigation attorneys" according to The Legal 500 US. He regularly represents financial institutions, accounting firms, Fortune 500 companies, boards of directors, and individuals in securities and other complex commercial litigation.
Mr. Hammel has won dozens of shareholder class actions and derivative litigations, as well as other complex commercial cases. Mr. Hammel is co-author of the treatise Federal Securities Litigation, 3d Edition, 2015.
Litigation experience includes:
- Friedman v. Endo Pharmaceuticals, 2018 WL 446189 (S.D.N.Y 2018) – Won dismissal of securities fraud claims against pharmaceutical manufacturer and its senior executives based on alleged omission of post-acquisition integration issues
- Fries v. Northern Oil & Gas, Inc., 2018 WL 388915 (S.D.N.Y. 2018) – Won dismissal of securities fraud claims against oil company and its CEO based on alleged stock manipulation
- Graham v. Fearon et al., (N.D. Ohio 2017), 2017 WL 1113358 (N.D. Ohio 2017), aff'd, 2018 WL 315098 (6th Cir. 2018) – Won dismissal of all ERISA claims against alleged fiduciaries of Eaton Corp. employee stock plan
- In re Eaton Corp. Securities Litigation, 2017 WL 4217146, (S.D.N.Y. 2017) – Won dismissal of securities fraud claims against Eaton and its senior executives based on alleged non-disclosure of tax consequences of a corporate transaction
- In re OmniVision, Inc. Shareholder Litigation, (Cal. Sup. Ct. Sept. 12, 2016) – Won dismissal of aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty claim against JP Morgan as financial advisor in an M&A transaction
- Dingee v. Wayfair Inc., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68322 (S.D.N.Y. 2016) – Won dismissal of securities fraud claims against company and senior executives based on alleged material misrepresentations regarding competitors
- Callan v. Motricity, Inc., 649 Fed. Appx. 526 (9th Cir. 2016) – Won affirmance of dismissal of Section 11 and 12 claims against underwriters, including JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs and Deutsche Bank based on alleged misrepresentations in IPO registration statement.
- Dempsey v. Vieau, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119245 (S.D.N.Y. 2015) – Won dismissal of securities fraud claims against executives of a technology company based on alleged failure to disclose product defects and customer sales issues
- Dudley v. Haub, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61386 (D.N.J. 2013) – Won dismissal of securities fraud claims against private equity firm and its chairman relating to bankruptcy of A&P supermarket chain
- In re A123 Systems, Inc. Securities Litigation, 2013 WL 987830 (D. Mass. 2013) – Won dismissal of securities fraud claims against manufacturer of electric vehicle batteries following disclosure of high profile product defect and costly product replacement campaign
- In re Herald, Primeo & Thema Funds Securities Litigation, 2011 WL 5928952 (S.D.N.Y. 2011) – Won dismissal of all claims in Madoff-related litigation
- In re Omnicom Group Inc. Securities Litigation, 597 F.3d 501 (2d Cir. 2010) – Won summary judgment on securities fraud claims, which was affirmed by the Second Circuit, establishing important “loss causation” precedent regarding the events affecting stock price that can support a claim for securities fraud
- In re Fannie Mae 2008 Securities Litigation, 742 F. Supp. 2d 382 (S.D.N.Y. 2010) – Won dismissal of virtually all securities fraud claims against Fannie Mae following its placement into federal conservatorship during the financial crisis
- In re Fannie Mae 2008 Securities Litigation, 2009 WL 4067259 (S.D.N.Y. 2009) – Won dismissal of Section 12(a)(2) and 15 claims against Fannie Mae, as well as against more than a dozen underwriters
- In re Omnicom Group Inc. Shareholder Derivative Litigation, A.D.3d 766 (N.Y. 1st Dep’t 2007) – Won unanimous appeal based on plaintiffs’ failure to plead “demand futility,” setting important New York precedent
- In re Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc. Securities Litigation, 501 F. Supp. 2d 452 (S.D.N.Y. 2006) – Won dismissal of securities fraud and Sections 11, 18 and state law claims against Deloitte, establishing important precedent on auditor liability issues