Lawyers

Jacob Croke is a partner in Sullivan & Cromwell’s Litigation Group. His practice focuses on advising major companies and boards of directors in complex litigations, regulatory proceedings, and internal investigations.

Jake has represented clients in a wide variety of matters in federal and state courts and in arbitration proceedings, including securities and derivative litigations, M&A-related disputes, bankruptcy proceedings, matters related to structured financial products, and the acquisitions of assets from failed financial institutions. He also has represented corporate and individual clients before the Department of Justice, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the United States Senate, the Federal Reserve, state attorneys general, and other governmental bodies. Jake also has advised companies, individuals, boards of directors and Special Committees in matters involving short seller allegations, digital currencies, SPACs, consumer lending, fiduciary duty issues, whistleblower claims, bank regulatory issues, mortgage-backed securities, data privacy issues, alleged benchmark interest rate manipulation, tax issues, and alleged insider trading.

Jake’s pro bono work includes arguing a criminal appeal before the New York Appellate Division, Second Department as an Assistant District Attorney and representation of an indigent defendant in federal court pursuant to the Criminal Justice Act.

• “Derivative Actions by Stockholders,” Business and Commercial Litigation in Federal Courts, Fifth Edition, co-author with Garrard Beeney, Brian Frawley and Bill Monahan (2021).
• “Privilege Waiver Risk Lessons From Twitter v. Musk,” Law360, co-author with Melissa Sawyer and Sheeva Nesva (October 2022).
• ​“Chancery Ruling Reiterates Its Skepticism Of De-SPAC Deals,” Law360, co-author with Laura Oswell and Matthew Strand (January 2023).

SELECTED REPRESENTATIONS

• FTX and affiliated entities as Debtors’ counsel in their pending Chapter 11 proceedings.
• Goldman Sachs in connection with its $5.1 billion global settlement with the DOJ, the New York, Illinois and California Attorneys General, the National Credit Union Administration and the Federal Home Loan Banks of Chicago and Seattle, resolving claims regarding Goldman’s structuring, underwriting and sales of residential mortgage-backed securities.
• Tiffany & Co. as plaintiff in Delaware Court of Chancery litigation against LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton, seeking to compel LVMH to complete its agreed-upon acquisition of Tiffany. LVMH ultimately completed its acquisition of Tiffany for approximately $16 billion in January 2021.
• UBS AG in an ongoing civil action by the DOJ alleging that UBS violated FIRREA in connection with $41 billion of residential mortgage-backed securities.
• Lordstown Motors in responding to short seller allegations and regulatory inquiries following its de-SPAC transaction, as well as members of the Board of the SPAC sponsor in connection with related securities, derivative, and Delaware breach of fiduciary duty litigations.
• Allianz in a series of litigations concerning the failure of the Structured Alpha funds during the market volatility of March 2020.
• Goldman Sachs in obtaining summary judgment dismissing class action fraud claims brought by investors alleging losses exceeding $2 billion in two CDO transactions.
• Hyzon Motors in responding to short seller allegations, regulatory inquiries and securities and derivative litigations following its de-SPAC transaction.
• Banco Popular de Puerto Rico in $300 million arbitrations with the FDIC regarding loans purchased from the FDIC as receiver of a failed bank.
• UBS AG in connection with an investigation by a consortium of state attorneys general regarding alleged benchmark interest rate manipulation.
• Goldman Sachs in a trust instruction proceeding in Minnesota state court involving a synthetic CDO.
• A major digital currency exchange in connection with various non-public regulatory and Congressional inquiries.
• A major financial institution in complying with a DOJ-imposed monitorship.
• A major financial institution in connection with a wide range of non-public regulatory and criminal investigations involving alleged insider trading, whistleblower claims and other issues.
• A major hedge fund in connection with an internal investigation into high-profile misconduct allegations.
• A major automotive company in connection with a commercial dispute regarding a risk-sharing agreement.
• A major financial institution in connection with stress test planning and related bank supervisory matters.
• A major hedge fund in connection with investments in structured products and other regulatory matters.
• A major financial institution in connection with an SEC investigation resulting in a declination after receiving a Wells Notice.