Search this site

Sequor Law represents the co-liquidator in R.R. Donnelley Argentina’s Chapter 15 petition in the Southern District of Florida to access a Citibank account and repatriate funds to the Argentine proceeding. Argentine Publisher Files for Chapter 15 Recognition in Florida to Access Citibank Account Open In the News Open January 25, 2018 2 minutes read Sequor Law By Benjamin Clarke One of the court-appointed liquidators of a “prominent” Argentine publishing company has filed for Chapter 15 recognition in Florida, in an effort to repatriate funds from a bank account held with Citibank in the US. Co-liquidator Mario Risso , of Argentine firm Risso Plastina y Asociados, filed the petition before Judge Robert Mark in the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida on 24 January, requesting recognition as the foreign representative of Donnelley Argentina (DA). DA is 98.47% owned by a company in Santiago that is a subsidiary of Chicago-headquartered communications network RR Donnelley. According to the declaration Risso filed at court, DA filed a bankruptcy petition at the 19th Commercial Court of Buenos Aires in August 2014, claiming it was insolvent due “in part” to the Argentine economic crisis. Counsel to Risso, Sequor Law partner Arnoldo Lacayo , tells GRR that although the economic crisis was the “primary driver” for the bankruptcy, there were other factors linked to the printing industry that predated the financial crisis. Shortly after DA started the proceedings, Argentina’s then president Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner accused its US parent company of breaching anti-terrorism laws, according to the Chicago Tribune . Kirchner allegedly said Donnelley had breached the laws because the shutdown of its Argentine subsidiary “will exacerbate her country’s economic woes”. Argentina’s federal tax authority also called for the arrest and imprisonment of DA’s directors, accusing the company of committing acts of fraud. The Buenos Aries court appointed Riso’s firm as co-liquidator, together with another Argentine outfit, Rego Saavedra, represented by Ana Rego and Maria Saavedra . During their investigation into the assets and liabilities of DA, the liquidators discovered that the company held a bank account with Citibank in the US. On 13 October, the Argentine court authorized them to take action in the US to recover any funds. Risso filed the Chapter 15 petition to enable the liquidators to “communicate with Citibank” regarding the account, and “take steps to repatriate the funds to the foreign proceeding”. He told the court he had satisfied each of the requirements for recognition under Chapter 15, and requested a stay against any action concerning DA’s estate. Judge Mark has listed a recognition hearing to take place on 20 February. In the United Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida In re R.R. Donnelley Argentina, S.A. Judge Robert Mark Counsel to the foreign representative ‐ Sequor Law Partner Arnoldo Lacayo and attorney Cristina Beard in Miami Foreign representative ‐ Risso Plastina y Asociados Mario Risso in Buenos Aires Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight Aug 17, 2026 3 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Carolina M. Rosso “Pour faire de grandes choses, il ne faut pas être un si grand génie... Firm News Jun 23, 2026 3 minutes Sequor Law Welcomes Attorney Carolina M. Rosso to Its Expanding International Litigation and Asset Recovery Team Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Carolina M. Rosso has joined the firm as an Attorney. Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more..

Sequor Law Shareholder Leyza B. Florin is inducted to the 32nd Class of The American College of Bankruptcy, recognized for professional excellence in bankruptcy and insolvency practice. Leyza B. Florin Inducted to the 32nd Class of The American College of Bankruptcy Open Awards & Recognition Open November 9, 2021 1 minute read Sequor Law Congratulations to Shareholder Leyza B. Florin for her induction to the 32nd Class of The American College of Bankruptcy and being honored and recognized for her professional excellence and her exceptional contributions to the bankruptcy and insolvency practice. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight Aug 17, 2026 3 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Carolina M. Rosso “Pour faire de grandes choses, il ne faut pas être un si grand génie... Firm News Jun 23, 2026 3 minutes Sequor Law Welcomes Attorney Carolina M. Rosso to Its Expanding International Litigation and Asset Recovery Team Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Carolina M. Rosso has joined the firm as an Attorney. Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more..

Who’s Who Legal recognizes Sequor Law founding shareholder Edward H. Davis, Jr. as a Thought Leader. He discusses boutique focus, asset recovery, and major Ponzi cases. Edward H. Davis, Jr., selected as a Who’s Who Legal Thought Leader Open Awards & Recognition Open November 30, 2017 4 minutes read Sequor Law Who’s Who Legal: Thought Leaders 2018 brings together the insight, expertise and wisdom of some of the world’s foremost lawyers in a single book. This year’s edition features Q&As with 67 eminent practitioners across 22 practice areas. These lawyers obtained the highest number of nominations from peers, corporate counsel and other market sources in our most recent research cycle. Edward H. Davis, Jr. Questions and Answers: Who’s Who Legal Thought Leaders: Asset Recovery Edward H Davis, Jr, a founding shareholder of the international law firm Astigarraga Davis, heads the firm’s asset recovery and financial fraud group which represents victims of serious fraud and grand corruption including governments, corporations, insolvency practitioners and individuals by investigating and prosecuting civil fraud and asset recovery actions. Who’s Who Legal: Asset Recovery has recognised Davis as the global Asset Recovery Lawyer of the Year from 2013 to 2016, and his firm as Asset Recovery Firm of the Year for 2015 and 2016. WHY DID YOU DECIDE TO SPECIALISE IN ASSET RECOVERY AND FRAUD WORK? I enjoy representing victims and helping them level the playing field with those that prey on them. As a result, I decided to focus my practice on the representation of individual, corporate and governmental victims of fraud throughout the world. I also enjoy learning about other legal cultures, and asset recovery and fraud work is a specialised form of international litigation. Lastly, I enjoy the “hunt” for those that have committed fraud and their ill-gotten gains. WHAT PROMPTED YOU TO FOUND YOUR OWN FIRM? My partners and I were seeking a better way to serve our clients in response to new factors in the industry affecting both the legal profession and our clients. Having a specialised boutique allows us to employ our “power of focus” concept and truly focus deeply on our practice groups and developments in the law to a degree that might not be attainable in a more generalised platform. Also, our boutique setting is nimbler and more cost-effective than that of many other firms, and allows us to take cases on alternative fee structures. WHAT MAKES FOR A SUCCESSFUL ASSET RECOVERY SPECIALIST? The actions taken in the first days following the discovery of a fraud often will determine whether the misappropriated funds or other property are ultimately recovered. Our team responds quickly to such fraud by using emergency injunctions, expedited depositions, subpoenas of bank records, our vast connections to experienced professionals and investigators around the world to seek to either locate the assets before they are dissipated or to investigate and bring claims against third parties who assisted the fraudsters. WHAT IS THE MOST MEMORABLE MATTER THAT YOU’VE WORKED ON TO DATE? Stanford International Bank, Ltd was an Antiguan bank that sold phony certificates of deposit to 21,000 depositors, which resulted in the second-largest Ponzi scheme in history by causing losses to over 27,000 depositor-victims from around the world. Estimated losses by depositor-victims exceeded $5 billion. WHAT CHALLENGES ARE FACING PRACTITIONERS AT THE MOMENT AND HOW IS YOUR FIRM LOOKING TO MEET THESE OBSTACLES? The pressure from clients to keep legal fees and costs as low as possible continues to be one of the challenges affecting practitioners. This can be a problem because of the crisis-like atmosphere in which successful asset recovery practitioners function. We combat these challenges by working closely with investigators, computer forensic experts, foreign lawyers, forensic accountants, law enforcement and other experts. These professionals are key resources in a rapid response to a discovered fraud which can lead to escalated costs (such as cost bonds) which would not be the norm in another practice area. Our firm has been meeting this particular challenge by offering alternative fee arrangements when historically the standard was solely hourly fee billing, and by working with litigation funders that assist victims of fraud who usually don’t have the resources to fight the fraudster after the fraud. DO YOU ANTICIPATE THAT THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY’S INCREASING READINESS TO TACKLE CORRUPTION WILL LEAD TO GROWING INTEREST IN ASSET RECOVERY WORK IN THE WIDER LEGAL MARKET? Yes, as technology continues to get more sophisticated, the speed of the movement of money throughout the world will likewise increase. This, combined with a growing awareness that national borders are no more an impediment to recovery than they are to the fraudster who moves across those same borders, will likely result in the interest in asset recovery work growing into a larger distinct legal market. We already see firms forming asset recovery departments and groups which is a signal that that the market is recognising this distinct practice area as an exciting new offering to their clients. HOW IMPORTANT ARE ORGANISATIONS SUCH THE ICC COMMERCIAL CRIMES SERVICES’ FRAUDNET NETWORK IN INTERNATIONAL ASSET RECOVERY WORK? Organizations like the ICC’s FraudNet are very important and necessary in the international asset recovery work. Fraudsters work using their own networks of cronies and those that provide them assistance – legal and otherwise. So it is essential that counter-networks operate at a high level of coordination to defeat them. They also are powerful change agents that raise awareness and educate fraud victims worldwide about the methods that can be deployed to assist them in their fight to recover their assets and damages. AS HEAD OF THE FIRM’S ASSET RECOVERY AND FINANCIAL FRAUD PRACTICE, IN WHAT WAYS ARE YOU ATTEMPTING TO DISTINGUISH YOUR GROUP FROM OTHER COMPETITORS IN THE MARKET? I work on creating innovative solutions. I’ve helped develop and expand various creative discovery and asset seizure methodologies to obtain recoveries for our clients. Additionally, I’ve both led and worked collaboratively on various civil asset recovery teams – another concept I helped pioneer – on cross-border asset recovery engagements. Having a strong commercial litigation and insolvency background, my team and I have championed and coordinated asset recovery efforts between civil and criminal systems as a means to penetrate and defeat complex opaque asset hiding structures used by fraudsters. I was recently mentioned by Latin Lawyer (2016) for my efforts in the area of asset recovery. Lastly, as a result of our efforts, I was also recognised as the global Asset Recovery Lawyer of the Year by Who’s Who Legal: Asset Recovery, in 2013 (and again in 2014, 2015 and 2016); my firm was recognised as the Asset Recovery Firm of the Year in 2015 and 2016 by the same publication. View PDF Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight Aug 17, 2026 3 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Carolina M. Rosso “Pour faire de grandes choses, il ne faut pas être un si grand génie... Firm News Jun 23, 2026 3 minutes Sequor Law Welcomes Attorney Carolina M. Rosso to Its Expanding International Litigation and Asset Recovery Team Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Carolina M. Rosso has joined the firm as an Attorney. Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more..

Who's Who Legal recognizes Sequor Law's Edward H. Davis Jr. as one of the foremost asset recovery lawyers, praised for identifying key issues and strategic thinking in complex financial disputes. Thought Leaders Global Elite – Asset Recovery (GIR 2019) Open Awards & Recognition Open September 5, 2019 1 minute read Sequor Law Who’s Who Legal says: Edward Davis Jr is one of the foremost lawyers in our research this year. Sources note, “He is particularly strong at identifying key issues and strategizing in ways that take those key issues into consideration.” Read the full article below or click here Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight Aug 17, 2026 3 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Carolina M. Rosso “Pour faire de grandes choses, il ne faut pas être un si grand génie... Firm News Jun 23, 2026 3 minutes Sequor Law Welcomes Attorney Carolina M. Rosso to Its Expanding International Litigation and Asset Recovery Team Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Carolina M. Rosso has joined the firm as an Attorney. Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more..

Sequor Law's Arnoldo Lacayo and Cristina Vicens win an Eleventh Circuit affirmation of Section 1782 orders, securing key discovery for a client in a foreign marital asset proceeding. 11th Circuit Court Of Appeals Affirms Sequor Law Section 1782 Orders Open Case Results Open November 17, 2020 1 minute read Sequor Law Sequor Law, led by Arnoldo B. Lacayo and Cristina Vicens , secured a favorable ruling from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirming the district court’s orders holding that Sequor Law’s client was entitled to receive judicial assistance under 28 U.S.C. § 1782. In In re Application of Rigail Pons , Sequor Law represents an ex-wife in a foreign proceeding where the foreign court is charged with conducting an inventory of marital assets. Based on indicia that the ex-husband did not completely and accurately disclose his marital assets, Sequor Law was able to deploy Section 1782 successfully to obtain documents and testimony from financial institutions and other discovery targets that had documents and information about marital assets that the ex-husband should have, but did not, disclose before the foreign court. The Eleventh Circuit agreed with the district court, that the evidence sought would be “for use” in the foreign proceeding where the ex-wife would have the opportunity to use the evidence to request that the foreign court carry out a supplemental inventory of marital assets, including assets that were not disclosed during the original inventory proceeding. This decision in favor of Sequor Law’s client is the second significant Section 1782 decision obtained by the firm at the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals following the 2014 decision in In re Application of Consorcio Ecuatoriano de Telecomunicaciones S.A. Click here to read the full opinion. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight Aug 17, 2026 3 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Carolina M. Rosso “Pour faire de grandes choses, il ne faut pas être un si grand génie... Firm News Jun 23, 2026 3 minutes Sequor Law Welcomes Attorney Carolina M. Rosso to Its Expanding International Litigation and Asset Recovery Team Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Carolina M. Rosso has joined the firm as an Attorney. Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more..

Sequor Law's March 2019 wins include a $22M civil theft judgment against a fraudulent Curacao scheme, a Chapter 15 revenue rule victory, and a successful appellate defense for First Citizens Bank. Recent Wins – March 2019 Open Case Results Open February 28, 2019 2 minutes read Sequor Law Sequor Law founding shareholder, Ed Davis , and attorney Nyana Miller , together with other members of the Sequor Law team, recently secured a $22 million civil theft judgment for a South American finance company. The client had lost $8.6 million to the thief, who attempted to hide behind a complex scheme involving a Curacao investment fund, the fund’s professional managers, several brokers, and a corporate entity that received the moneys as custodian for another entity. After years of litigation (including an appeal relating to service of process that was heard by the Venezuelan Supreme Court), the trial court found the corporate custodian and the individual who controlled that company liable for unjust enrichment, conversion, fraud and civil theft. Greg Grossman and Nyana Miller faced an issue of first impression regarding the revenue rule and Chapter 15 of the US Bankruptcy Code. The revenue rule is the common law principle that one sovereign does not collect or enforce the taxes of another (absent an exception, such as a tax treaty). In a cross border bankruptcy case where the largest creditor is the foreign tax agency and the debtor argues that the bankruptcy was a means of enforcing foreign tax claims, Sequor defeated a motion to dismiss the Chapter 15 case. Judge Delano of the US Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Florida held that a court in a chapter 15 case does not administer claims and therefore recognition of a foreign proceeding cannot violate the revenue rule. The Fourth District Court of Appeals affirmed a final judgment entered in favor of First Citizens Bank & Trust Company, N.A., represented by Greg Grossman and Dan Coyle of Sequor Law. The Court rejected the appellants’ arguments that causes of action against the borrowers and guarantors for breach of note and breach of guarantees could not have been assigned by the FDIC, on behalf of Sun American Bank, to First Citizens after Sun American Bank had obtained a final judgment of foreclosure. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight Aug 17, 2026 3 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Carolina M. Rosso “Pour faire de grandes choses, il ne faut pas être un si grand génie... Firm News Jun 23, 2026 3 minutes Sequor Law Welcomes Attorney Carolina M. Rosso to Its Expanding International Litigation and Asset Recovery Team Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Carolina M. Rosso has joined the firm as an Attorney. Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more..

Explore how Rule 4(f) international service of process provides options for serving defendants abroad without an international agreement. Learn more about Rule 4(f) international service of process strategies. Service of Process Abroad: No International Agreement? Open Legal Insights Open May 23, 2022 2 minutes read Sequor Law Serving a defendant outside the United States can quickly become one of the most procedurally complex stages of a case—particularly when the destination country is not a signatory to the Hague Service Convention or any other applicable international service treaty . But the absence of a treaty does not leave litigants without options. In their article for ThoughtLeaders4 FIRE Magazine (Issue 9) , Sequor Law Shareholder Leyza Blanco , Attorney Juan Mendoza , and Attorney Alejandro Rodriguez Vanzetti examine how Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(f) provides workable mechanisms for effecting service abroad even when no international agreement governs. The authors take a practical, court-centered approach to Rule 4(f) , explaining how its structure allows litigants to pursue several avenues depending on the circumstances. While treaty-based service under Rule 4(f)(1) is often the first consideration, the analysis does not end there. The article discusses how courts interpret Rule 4(f)(2) and 4(f)(3) , particularly in jurisdictions where no international agreement applies or where traditional channels are ineffective. Emphasis is placed on due process, judicial discretion, and the requirement that any proposed method be reasonably calculated to provide notice. Importantly, the article highlights how courts assess whether a proposed method is affirmatively prohibited by foreign law, how alternative service has evolved in response to modern realities, and what evidentiary support judges expect when litigants seek court-directed service. Rather than treating service abroad as a rigid procedural obstacle, the authors frame it as a strategic issue—one that requires careful analysis of the rule, the foreign jurisdiction, and the factual record before the court. For practitioners confronting cross-border defendants in commercial litigation , fraud matters , or enforcement proceedings, this piece offers a grounded examination of the available procedural tools and the considerations that can influence a court’s decision. To explore the full discussion and case analysis, we invite you to read the complete article in the T4 Fire magazine PDF (pages 48–50). Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight Aug 17, 2026 3 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Carolina M. Rosso “Pour faire de grandes choses, il ne faut pas être un si grand génie... Firm News Jun 23, 2026 3 minutes Sequor Law Welcomes Attorney Carolina M. Rosso to Its Expanding International Litigation and Asset Recovery Team Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Carolina M. Rosso has joined the firm as an Attorney. Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more..

The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously rules that private and investor-state arbitration tribunals are not "foreign tribunals" under 28 U.S.C. § 1782, limiting its use in international arbitration discovery. US Supreme Court Rules on Use of Section 1782 in Support of Arbitration Proceedings Open Legal Insights Open July 8, 2022 1 minute read Sequor Law In a unanimous decision, the U.S. Supreme Court held that two arbitration tribunals—one private and one investor-state—did not constitute “foreign or international tribunal[s]” under 28 U.S.C. § 1782. The statute is widely used by litigants to obtain discovery “for use in a proceeding in a foreign or international tribunal.” The decision came after years with a split among the Courts of Appeals on the issue, particularly in the area of international private arbitration. In its 17-page decision, the Court analyzed the language of the statute and its history noting that § 1782’s purpose is comity. The Court reasoned that a broad reading of §1782 “would open district court doors to any interested person seeking assistance for proceedings before any private adjudicative body—a category broad enough to include everything from a commercial arbitration panel to a university’s student disciplinary tribunal.” Opting for a narrower construction, the Court held that “only governmental or intergovernmental adjudicative bodies constitute a ‘foreign or international tribunal’ under § 1782”, adding that, “[s]uch bodies are those that exercise governmental authority conferred by one nation or multiple nations.” More on the decision can be found here . Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight Aug 17, 2026 3 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Carolina M. Rosso “Pour faire de grandes choses, il ne faut pas être un si grand génie... Firm News Jun 23, 2026 3 minutes Sequor Law Welcomes Attorney Carolina M. Rosso to Its Expanding International Litigation and Asset Recovery Team Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Carolina M. Rosso has joined the firm as an Attorney. Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more..

Sequor Law's Gregory Grossman and Bruno de Camargo counsel the foreign representative of Brazilian mining group Brasagro as it files Chapter 15 in Miami to probe questionable transactions. Brazilian mining group seeks recognition in Miami Open In the News Open October 18, 2019 2 minutes read Sequor Law By Benjamin Clarke The foreign representative of a Brazilian limestone mining group has applied for Chapter 15 recognition of its liquidation in Miami, after finding it had entered several “questionable” transactions and agreements. Brazilian lawyer Reinaldo Camargo do Nascimento, the foreign representative of Brasagro Fertilizantes Minerais and Petrocal Industria e Comercio De Cal, filed the petition in the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District on 15 October, with counsel from Gregory Grossman and Bruno de Camargo of Sequor Law. Camargo, who was appointed judicial administrator of the debtors three years ago, told the US court he needed recognition to investigate the extent of any activities undertaken in the US that might be related to the debtors and their assets. “Investigations into the debtors have highlighted a number of questionable transactions and agreements,” he revealed in a declaration. “[I]t appears that after petitioning for judicial reorganisation, the insolvent Brasagro entered into an agreement with its parent company… to pay any bills the parent company was unable to pay up to US$15,000 a month,” he said. “There appears to be no additional considerations for this agreement.” “It is believed that there are more such agreements and transactions involving the debtors which may lead to information of diversion of assets abroad, particularly with insiders or affiliates,” he added. Brasagro and Petrocal filed reorganisation proceedings in Belo Horizonte in May 2014. But the proceedings were later moved to Rondonópolis in Mato Grosso, where the companies operate. The Rondonópolis court appointed Camargo as judicial administrator, and his subsequent report into the companies’ activities prompted the court to find there was no possibility of them successfully reorganising their debts. It converted the proceedings into a liquidation in January 2017. Camargo said that prior to the bankruptcy order, the companies’ debts totalled about 129 million reais (US$31.2 million), but this number had since increased. “I intend to investigate the nature and extent of any activities undertaken in the United States that may be related to the debtors and their assets,” he told the court. “[A]s well as any assets in the United States that may have been acquired using funds belonging to or traceable from the debtors.” He said he has also been given the responsibility of filing proceedings and asserting propriety claims against any third parties in the US that may owe the companies money. Such actions will give creditors of the companies further recovery opportunities, he said. Judge Jay Cristol has not yet set a recognition hearing date. In the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida, Miami Division Judge Jay Cristol Counsel to the foreign representative Sequor Law Shareholder Gregory Grossman and attorney Bruno de Camargo in Miami In the Fourth Civil Court of Mato Grosso, Rondonópolis Judge Renan Calos Leão do Nascimento Pereira Judicial administrator Reinaldo Camargo do Nascimento in Mato Grosso To view the original article, click here. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight Aug 17, 2026 3 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Carolina M. Rosso “Pour faire de grandes choses, il ne faut pas être un si grand génie... Firm News Jun 23, 2026 3 minutes Sequor Law Welcomes Attorney Carolina M. Rosso to Its Expanding International Litigation and Asset Recovery Team Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Carolina M. Rosso has joined the firm as an Attorney. Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more..

Rolling Stone’s 2018 feature on the ‘kill list’ case put Tara J. Plochocki’s fight for a citizen’s due process rights before a national audience. How to Survive America’s Kill List Open In the News Open July 19, 2018 2 minutes read Sequor Law When *Rolling Stone* gave a single federal lawsuit the full weight of a long-form investigative feature, it made a quiet argument: the question of whether a citizen can be killed without a hearing belongs to the public, not only to lawyers and judges working behind closed doors. The 2018 piece followed Bilal Abdul Kareem, an American journalist who came to believe his work in Syria had landed him on a secret government targeting list after he survived a series of airstrikes. What might have read as a personal survival story instead opened onto a constitutional question most Americans never face: whether a citizen can even find out that his government has marked him for a drone strike, and whether a court is allowed to review that decision at all. For the press, these are not abstract concerns. Kareem was reporting from a war zone, and the case raised the prospect that journalists doing dangerous, unpopular work could be swept into a lethal designation with no way to contest it. Press freedom and due process rights, usually treated as separate concerns, met in a single file. A magazine known for cultural reporting recognized that and gave it the length the subject demanded, reaching readers who would never open a national security law journal. Carrying that litigation was attorney Tara J. Plochocki , who represented Kareem alongside the human rights organization Reprieve. The matter produced a notable result: a federal judge allowed his due process claim to move forward, refusing to treat the government's targeted killing authority as entirely beyond judicial review. For a citizen who wanted nothing more than a chance to be heard before the use of lethal force, that ruling mattered. The feature is worth reading in full for how it turns a dense legal fight into human terms. Sequor Law points readers to the original reporting: "How to Survive America's Kill List." The case also says something about the kind of work that defines Plochocki's record. She took it on earlier in her career; today she is a Partner at Sequor Law, where she leads the firm's Washington, D.C. office. An ICC FraudNet member admitted to the U.S. Supreme Court and the D.C. and Second Circuits, she built a practice around cross-border asset recovery, financial fraud, and international commercial litigation, and she still litigates at the intersection of constitutional rights, international law, and national security, including amicus briefs on the laws of war. Beyond one man's ordeal, the feature kept a single premise in view: that government power, however secret, still answers to the Constitution — a kill list included. Testing that in court, and a national publication taking the time to explain why it counts, kept a hard question from slipping out of public view. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight Aug 17, 2026 3 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Carolina M. Rosso “Pour faire de grandes choses, il ne faut pas être un si grand génie... Firm News Jun 23, 2026 3 minutes Sequor Law Welcomes Attorney Carolina M. Rosso to Its Expanding International Litigation and Asset Recovery Team Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Carolina M. Rosso has joined the firm as an Attorney. Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more..

Sequor Law's Nyana Abreu Miller and Raul Torrao analyze Brazil's landmark bankruptcy reform implementing UNCITRAL's Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency and its impact on distressed companies. Cross-Border Insolvency In Brazil: The UNCITRAL Model Law Dances to A Samba Beat Open Legal Insights Open June 15, 2021 13 minutes read Sequor Law By Nyana Abreu Miller and Raul Torrao After years of debate, Brazil recently enacted legislation amending its bankruptcy statute and modernizing the Brazilian insolvency system. The new legislation provides new domestic tools to rescue distressed companies from disaster, including rules that enable DIP financing and allow creditors to propose a plan when the debtor’s proposal is unsatisfactory. In the cross-border insolvency area, the new law implements the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law on Cross–Border Insolvency . The basic framework of the UNCITRAL Model Law familiar to insolvency practitioners has been road-tested in 48 countries prior to Brazil’s recent legislative change. The Model Law seeks to identify the jurisdiction where the debtor’s center of main interests (COMI) is located, and deems the insolvency proceeding filed in that jurisdiction the “foreign main proceeding.” Under Brazil’s version of the Model Law, an insolvency proceeding filed in a jurisdiction other than the debtor’s COMI and where the debtor engages in non-transitory economic activities or holds property is a “foreign non-main proceeding.” The Model Law’s vision is that a troubled multi-national business will be able to break through the disparate and sometimes contradictory insolvency regimes in different nations. The Model Law promotes cooperation across borders in order to accomplish laudable objectives, such as the rescue of financially troubled businesses. Where Brazil is the debtor’s COMI, the new law is, in many ways, simply a codification of the existing practice. For many years, in cases where Brazil is the debtor’s COMI, Brazilian insolvencies have sought recognition and cooperation through ancillary proceedings abroad. A prominent example is the liquidation of the Brazilian bank Banco Santos, where the Brazilian trustee was able to recover and sell over 90 pieces of valuable artwork with the cooperation of foreign courts and use the repatriated proceeds to pay creditors. However, until now, Brazilian courts could not give reciprocal treatment to foreign main proceedings when the debtor’s COMI was outside of Brazil. Indeed, prior requests to enforce foreign bankruptcy decisions in Brazil through exequatur proceedings were rebuffed. See , e.g. , Gutmen Investiment Corp v. Manacá S A Armazens Gerais e Administração , Case No. SEC 11277 / VG, rapporteur Min. Maria Thereza de Assis Moura, Decision on request for granting exequatur to foreign judgment (Superior Tribunal of Justice Jul. 1, 2016). See also , Antônio Moraes Sarmento Patrício v. Vera Maria Brak Lamy P. Raposo Patkoczy Fonseca , Case No. SEC 1.734/PT, rapporteur Min. Fernando Gonçalves, Decision on request for granting exequatur to foreign judgment (Superior Tribunal of Justice Feb. 16, 2011). Under the new law, Brazil embraces the Model Law’s modified universalism and provides its courts with the basis to recognize and provide assistance to both main and non-main foreign proceedings. In some respects, the new Brazilian legislation deviates from the suggested wording in the Model Law in order to emphasize the broad cooperation available. Opening the Gate: The Request for Recognition To access comity and cooperation from a Brazilian court, the representative of the foreign insolvency proceeding (foreign representative) must pass through the gateway referred to as “recognition” in the Model Law. The foreign representative must file a request for recognition with the court of the place where the debtor has its principal “establishment” in Brazil under the Model Law definition, meaning the place of operations where the debtor carries out a non-transitory economic activity with human means and goods or services. If a voluntary or involuntary bankruptcy proceeding of the debtor was previously filed in Brazil, the foreign representative must file the request for recognition with the same court where that plenary proceeding had been filed. The new law sets out the requirements for obtaining recognition of a foreign insolvency proceeding. The request is a straightforward document attaching evidence of the existence of the foreign proceeding, the appointment of the foreign representative, and, in practice, information sufficient to provide the context necessary to grant the relief sought. “One of the key objectives of the Model Law is to establish simplified procedures for recognition of qualifying foreign proceedings that would avoid time-consuming legalization or other processes and provide certainty with respect to the decision to recognize.” Guide to Enactment and Interpretation of the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency , ¶29 (the Guide). In practice, this means that filing an application for recognition should not be an onerous process. For a proceeding to qualify for recognition under the Model Law (and Brazil’s enactment thereof), it must be a collective proceeding. A collective proceeding is one in which “substantially all of the assets and liabilities of the debtor are dealt with in the proceeding, subject to local priorities and statutory exceptions, and to local exclusions relating to the rights of secured creditors.” See,Id. at ¶70. This requirement sheds light on the Model Law’s intent “to provide a tool for achieving a coordinated, global solution for all stakeholders of an insolvency proceeding,” and not merely to be used by a single creditor pursuing collection or by a debtor winding up its affairs in a proceeding that does not address claims of creditors. See , Id . at ¶69. As part of the recognition process, the court must determine the debtor’s COMI, and that will directly affect what relief is available to the foreign representative. The court will recognize the foreign proceeding as a “foreign main proceeding” if it was filed in the jurisdiction where the debtor’s COMI is located or alternatively as a “foreign non-main proceeding” if it was filed in any other jurisdiction. Although the concept of COMI is new to Brazilian law and neither the new law nor the Model Law defines it, that concept has been long present in cross-border insolvency practice and discussed by the international insolvency community for many years. (The Model Law’s concept of COMI must not be confused with the concept of the debtor’s “principal establishment,” which is used in the Brazilian bankruptcy statute to determine the appropriate venue for a domestic bankruptcy case. The Brazilian bankruptcy statute does not define “principal establishment,” and at least three different approaches have emerged in the case law. The approach that seems to be gaining favor is the so-called economic approach — that is, the “vital center of the debtor’s main activities” and “where the debtor has the highest business volume” — as the majoritarian theory. However, to identify a debtor’s COMI, Brazilian practitioners should look not to domestic decisions about the debtor’s “principal establishment” but to the text of the new law, to the Guide and to other jurisdictions where the Model Law has been implemented.) As the Guide explains, the concept of COMI originates from the European Union Convention on Insolvency Proceedings, and it should be interpreted homogeneously in furtherance of harmonization of the notion of a “main proceeding.” See , Id . at ¶¶81-82. Determining the debtor’s COMI is one of the most important steps in cross-border insolvency proceedings, and a consistent interpretation of such concept throughout all jurisdictions that adopted the Model Law is key to promote the uniformity prescribed by Article 8 of the Model Law. In short, the definition of debtor’s center of main interests is “the place where the debtor conducts the administration of his interests on a regular basis and is therefore ascertainable by third parties.” See,Id . at ¶83. Both the new law and the Model law provide for a rebuttable presumption that the debtor’s COMI is the debtor’s registered office or habitual residence. That legal presumption may be set aside if objective circumstances recognized by third parties indicate that the debtor has its administrative seat in another jurisdiction. The analysis of the objective circumstances may consider different facts, from the location of the debtor’s headquarters or factory where the debtor manufactures its products to the country code of the debtor’s website or phone number. Such interpretation of the COMI enables parties to better calculate legal risks when entering into transactions. When considering potential insolvency as a risk factor, the party may assume that international jurisdiction will be based on a place known to the debtor’s potential creditors. See , Id . at ¶84. Interestingly, the new Brazilian law includes a provision to avoid forum shopping that has no equivalent in the Model Law. In Brazil, the foreign proceeding will be recognized as a “foreign non-main proceeding” if the debtor’s COMI was transferred or manipulated with the intent to transfer the debtor’s “foreign main” jurisdiction to another country. While such a provision is intended to increase legal certainty and reduce forum shopping, it could trigger additional litigation about the debtor’s intent and about the appropriate lookback period, which is not specified in the new law. Types of Relief Available While recognition turns on the strict application of objective criteria, the consequences of recognition (referred to as the “relief” in the Model Law or as “medidas” in the new Brazilian law) are largely discretionary. This arrangement reflects a need for efficiency and predictability in obtaining recognition, but equips the courts with the flexibility to fashion the relief that should result from recognition. The new law makes available to the foreign representative broad discretionary relief both before and after recognition of the foreign proceeding. From the filing of the application for recognition to the court’s ruling on such request, the foreign representative may request any injunctive relief necessary to protect the estate, the efficiency of the administration, or the enforcement of Brazilian bankruptcy law. Upon recognition of the foreign proceeding, either as a “main” or “non-main” proceeding, the foreign representative may request any relief necessary for the protection of the assets of the estate and in the creditor’s interest. The drafter’s intent to provide Brazilian courts with the flexibility to fashion meaningful relief is evident in two provisions in the Brazilian law that differ slightly from those in the Model Law. First, in the list of discretionary relief available after recognition, the Model Law includes a catchall provision allowing the court to grant “additional relief that may be available to [the trustee] under the laws of this State.” See , Model Law, Art. 21 (g). The Brazilian law would allow the court to “grant any additional relief that may be necessary” and is not limited by reference to the powers of a Brazilian trustee. See , Art. 167-N, V – Law 11.101/2005. Second, the new Brazilian law includes a provision with no parallel in the Model Law by clarifying that the relief available under the cross-border insolvency chapter of the new law are “merely exemplary” and that relief available under “other laws” may be sought. See , Art. 167-A §2 – Law 11.101/2005. It is unclear whether this phrase would allow lawsuits, such as claw backs, under non-Brazilian laws, or whether it is limited to “other [Brazilian] laws.” In addition to the permissive relief, the new law provides for automatic relief if the foreign proceeding is recognized as a “foreign main proceeding”: i) the stay of specific lawsuits against the debtor; ii) the toll of the statute of limitations for the enforcement actions against the debtor; and iii) the avoidance of transfers and encumbrances of the debtor’s non-current assets without previous court authorization. It is important to note that under Brazil’s bankruptcy laws the stay of proceedings against the debtor is narrower compared to some other jurisdictions. Brazilian insolvency law provides numerous legal exceptions to the stay or suspension of lawsuits. In broad terms, Brazil’s insolvency laws impose a stay only to non-tax judgment enforcement proceedings and other actions directly related to the debtor’s assets . Ordinary lawsuits and arbitration proceedings at a pre-judgment phase are not stayed either by operation of Brazil’s general insolvency law. Accordingly, obtaining automatic or discretionary stays under Brazil’s adoption of the Model Law imposes a less robust set of prohibitions. Granting Recognition to Foreign Insolvency Proceedings vs. Granting Exequatur to Foreign Judgments Brazilian commentators have expressed some concern that the new law’s recognition of foreign proceedings could be confused with the previously existing mechanisms for international judicial assistance in Brazil, namely exequatur of foreign judgments and letters rogatory. In fact, granting recognition of foreign insolvency proceedings has little or nothing to do with granting exequatur . The Model Law was created as a necessary alternative to the legal systems’ traditional approach to judicial cooperation under the comity doctrine and exequatur . See , Guide, ¶8. While the new law sets forth a streamlined process by which the bankruptcy courts (courts of first instance) shall recognize foreign proceedings, the Brazilian constitution grants to the Superior Tribunal of Justice (STJ) — a centralized court superior to the state and federal courts of appeals — jurisdiction over exequatur of foreign judgments and letters rogatory. Those who understand the purpose and effect of the recognition of foreign insolvency proceedings , including those who drafted Brazil’s new law, do not see a conflict with the STJ’s exequatur jurisdiction. Acknowledging that recognition under the new law does not encroach upon the STJ’s exequatur jurisdiction, the new law expressly submits to the STJ’s constitutional jurisdiction over exequatur “whenever applicable.” See , Art. 167-A§6 – Law 11.101/2005. While this reference to the STJ’s exequatur proceedings has been the source of some debate leading up to the law’s implementation, most Brazilian commentators take the position that such provision does not impede the local bankruptcy courts from recognizing foreign insolvency proceedings. Indeed, recognizing a foreign insolvency proceeding is not tantamount to enforcing an order issued by the judicial authority of a sovereign state. For example, a foreign administrative proceeding in which no court orders whatsoever have been made is eligible for recognition under Brazil’s new law. In addition, the Brazilian legislature implemented a system to recognize foreign insolvency proceedings and expressly granted jurisdiction to the trial court of the place where the debtor has its principal “establishment” to hear such cases. It would be illogical to interpret that, in writing rules with specific provisions on the jurisdiction to process requests for recognition, the legislature, in fact, intended the Superior Tribunal of Justice to have jurisdiction to rule on such petitions. Another context in which the STJ’s exequatur jurisdiction may become relevant is where the Brazilian bankruptcy court is asked to cooperate with a court order entered in the foreign proceeding. The new law requires the bankruptcy court to cooperate “to the maximum possible extent with the foreign authority or with the foreign representative[.]” See, Art. 167-P – Law 11.101/2005. This provision implies that certain deference may be given to orders made in the foreign main proceeding, such as orders confirming a plan of reorganization, orders made in a claim dispute between debtor and creditor, and discovery orders. The cooperation called for in the new law does not require that such orders be enforced directly in Brazil. Cooperation can be achieved by giving deferential treatment to such orders in light of the law’s international origin and objectives. Giving deferential treatment means recognizing the foreign court’s better position to rule on the matter as the court with the main interest and most information on the issue, and to refrain from reviewing the matter de novo . It also means recognizing that when acting as the ancillary court, the Brazilian court cannot impose its own domestic priority scheme or claims process on the debtor. The ancillary court must remain focused on the goals expressly noted in the new law: promotion of international cooperation with foreign courts and representatives, greater legal certainty, and fair and efficient administration of cross-border insolvencies. By giving deferential treatment to an order in the foreign main proceeding, the ancillary court may avoid a conflict and a duplication of efforts that could weigh down efforts to rescue a struggling enterprise. A Plenary Bankruptcy Proceeding A debtor whose foreign main or non-main proceedings have been recognized in Brazil may commence a full liquidation or reorganization case if the relief available in the ancillary case is insufficient to accomplish its purposes. As a preliminary matter, it is important to understand the distinction between the ancillary proceedings contemplated under the Model Law and the plenary proceedings that may be commenced to reorganize or liquidate a company under Brazilian law. The gateway for ancillary proceedings is through the Model Law’s streamlined recognition process and simple eligibility criteria, embodied in Articles 167-H and 167-J of the new Brazilian law. The reward for entering through this gate is the relief described in Articles 167-L, 167-M, and 167-N of the new law. Ancillary proceedings are an act of comity between nations and thus they are simple proceedings that attempt to avoid duplication of effort. In this vein, the Model Law and Brazil’s enactment of it do not establish a separate claims process or reorganization plan in the ancillary proceeding. Indeed, the Model Law envisions that these should be handled in the foreign main proceeding. A plenary proceeding, on the other hand, is a full liquidation or reorganization case, which in Brazil is governed by the other chapters of Law 11.101/2005. A debtor whose foreign main or non-main proceedings have been recognized in Brazil may commence a liquidation or reorganization case only if the debtor has assets or an establishment in Brazil, and that Brazilian plenary case will apply only to the Brazilian assets or establishment. The new law sets forth measures for cooperation and coordination between the Brazilian plenary case and the foreign main proceeding. It should be noted that even in the absence of a petition for a plenary proceeding, Brazil’s new law allows the court to grant broad discretionary relief to the recognized foreign proceeding. Thus, there may be few instances in which foreign representatives might be interested in filing a plenary proceeding petition with the Brazilian court. This may change if Brazilian courts limit in practice the relief available to ancillary proceedings under their ample discretion. In any event, creditors also may initiate an involuntary plenary proceeding, especially if they are interested in establishing a claims process in Brazil, which is unavailable in the ancillary proceeding. Generally, the party filing for a voluntary or involuntary plenary proceeding must show the petition meets the bankruptcy requirements under Brazilian law. Specifically, the foreign representative will have to show in the reorganization petition that the debtor is in regular business activity for more than two years and meets other requirements of the statute, such as not having been through reorganization in the last five years. See , Art. 48 – Law 11.101/2005. To initiate a liquidation proceeding in Brazil, the requesting party must show the so-called “legal insolvency” of the debtor by meeting one of the three statutory requirements: 1) unjustified default of an obligation over 40 minimum wages; 2) nonpayment of any amount under a judgment enforcement action; or 3) performance of any of the seven acts of bankruptcy listed in the statute ( e.g. , fraudulent transfer of property to avoid creditors or default on an obligation provided for in a reorganization plan). See, Art 94 – Law 11.101/2015. Relevantly, the new law provides that the insolvency of the debtor is presumed if the foreign proceeding was recognized in Brazil as a “foreign main proceeding.” However, it is not clear if such presumption of the debtor’s insolvency is sufficient to show the “legal insolvency” requirement in liquidation petitions. Outbound Cross-Border Insolvency and Communication With Foreign Representative and Courts The new law does not limit its rules to inbound cross-border insolvency proceedings. It also includes rules related to outbound proceedings, which empower the representative of the Brazilian insolvency proceeding and the Brazilian court to seek recognition abroad and to act in that proceeding. Under the new law, the trustee in the Brazilian liquidation and the debtor in the Brazilian reorganization are automatically authorized to act as representatives of the Brazilian proceeding in foreign jurisdictions. The Brazilian court may appoint a different representative for the Brazilian liquidation when necessary. Moreover, the new law abrogates the long-established requirements of formal communication with foreign courts through letters rogatory. It expressly grants broad communication powers to the Brazilian bankruptcy court and trustee with foreign courts, representatives, and authorities. Overall, the new law adheres closely to the Model Law and provides Brazilian bankruptcy courts with the tools to effectively cooperate in cross-border insolvencies. After many years of receiving international assistance for Brazilian insolvency proceedings, Brazilian courts are now ready to reciprocate. The tools for effective cooperation are in place and the Brazilian legal community is eager to usher in a new era. To read the original article, click here. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight Aug 17, 2026 3 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Carolina M. Rosso “Pour faire de grandes choses, il ne faut pas être un si grand génie... Firm News Jun 23, 2026 3 minutes Sequor Law Welcomes Attorney Carolina M. Rosso to Its Expanding International Litigation and Asset Recovery Team Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Carolina M. Rosso has joined the firm as an Attorney. Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more..

Sequor Law Counsel Nyana Abreu Miller shares insights on being a trilingual woman in international law, her promotion, IWIRC leadership, and her commitment to empowering women in the legal profession. Attorney Spotlight: Nyana A. Miller Open Attorney Spotlight Open March 22, 2022 5 minutes read Sequor Law Nyana Abreu Miller , recently appointed Counsel at Sequor Law, shares insights on the benefits of being a trilingual woman in the international law industry and her efforts to empower women in law. In 2021, you were promoted to Counsel. How did the promotion change your role as an attorney? The promotion grew my responsibilities both within and outside of Sequor, changing the way I am perceived and providing me with new opportunities for professional growth, such as increased public speaking engagements. Within the firm, my position as Counsel entails significant managerial duties, such as supervising the Junior Associates. How has your role as New Network and Regional Development Co-Director of IWIRC benefitted you as a Sequor Law Counsel? The role provides a great opportunity to network and get to know other women in the insolvency space. Our committee works to launch International Women’s Insolvency & Restructuring Confederation (IWIRC) networks in places that do not have a professional development group for women in insolvency. This has provided a platform for me to learn about the insolvency industry in different countries and to bring something new to the table. Working together with other motivated professionals on a project that we are passionate about helps to grow deeper professional relationships. When business opportunities arise within those relationships, we are not mere acquaintances who met at a conference, we are colleagues who have been collaborating on a passion project for years. How does IWIRC help to empower women in law? For me, personally, it has been transformational to connect with other women who are succeeding and striving to grow in the same industry. At each IWIRC event, I am inspired by the many different role models that I encounter, and I find them to be very approachable and candid about what it has taken for them to succeed. These experiences have been essential in my ability to shape my own path. You’re regularly invited to speak on topics related to international asset recovery. How have the opportunities impacted your role as a trilingual attorney? I was born in Brazil and raised in the U.S., with English being my second language after Portuguese. I learned to speak Spanish in the U.S. as a third language. Since I work in Latin America a great deal, my language skills have opened many doors for me. Early in my career, I was invited to speak at events where there was no budget for translators or translations, so my multilingual capabilities gained me invaluable exposure. For example, I was a guest lecturer at the Federal Judicial College in Mexico City. It was an excellent opportunity to discuss the use of insolvency as an asset recovery tool with students of the Judicial College, and it would not have been possible to do in English. Of course, I also participate in larger conferences that do have simultaneous translation, such as the OffshoreAlert Conference, but where English is not the common language for all panelists and most of the audience, sometimes it is more convenient to conduct the panel in the local language. Given your tenure as an asset recovery attorney, what is the most important thing you have learned? The most important thing I learned is to follow my instincts and study the fact patterns as they relate to people in the cases. Our cases ultimately come down to people. It’s important to develop a sense of who the target is, their character, preferences and habits. An asset recovery case is only half legal strategy and the rest is about being able to anticipate and catch up to the target. Does speaking three languages facilitate your work on cases? Absolutely! For cases that are document-intensive, being able to read the primary document myself is a game-changer. Translation takes time, costs money and is imperfect. When an important document is discovered or a decision is entered by the foreign court, I can immediately review the document myself and engage in a meaningful discussion about it. I still lean on the local council to assist in interpreting legal documents in Portuguese and Spanish, but at least I can participate in the brainstorming that takes place as events develop and significant documents are discovered. What advice would you give to young female attorneys? I advise young women to look not only for a variety of mentors and role models but also for sponsors within their organization. A sponsor is someone who will help channel good work and opportunities to you, and it is a person who will support you even when you make a mistake. Everyone makes mistakes but it is how they are perceived by leadership that is critical. When people in management feel that the mistake is relatable or perhaps reminds them of something that happened to them, the employee who made the mistake will simply get another chance. And when you are a working mom or the only woman in an organization, you don’t want a simple mistake to be interpreted as a lack of commitment or some deeper problem. It’s important to have someone in the management room to vouch for you and help everyone else to put things into the proper perspective. How does Sequor Law distinguish itself from competitors in the market? Because of the size and strength of our team, we are very nimble. We are not a shop of generalists that tries to be all things to all people. Each of our professionals has deep knowledge of asset recovery and significant practical experience. We vigilantly monitor developments in our area of practice and we are able to draw on our depth of knowledge when we advise clients and help them craft the best recovery strategy for their case. The focus of an asset recovery case may change very quickly, and we need to be able to deploy investigative, analytical and legal resources wherever the target may pop up. We have capabilities in-house to be able to steer the ship. However, one very important aspect of our identity as a boutique firm is that we maintain a strong network of asset recovery professionals that we can rely on throughout the globe. So if the target buys an asset in a new offshore jurisdiction, we can phone a friend who will spring to action as part of our team. What inspired you to study law? As a child, I read all the Nancy Drew books. Although my heroine was a girl detective, when I actually got old enough to think about a career, I realized that I enjoyed the reading a bit more than I would enjoy driving around and chasing criminals. I realized that after a case was solved it had to be tried. My grandfather was a state court judge in Kansas, so he was a great role model and ambassador for the law. When I was in high school, he took me to the courthouse for a motion calendar and I decided that law was the path for me! Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight Aug 17, 2026 3 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Carolina M. Rosso “Pour faire de grandes choses, il ne faut pas être un si grand génie... Firm News Jun 23, 2026 3 minutes Sequor Law Welcomes Attorney Carolina M. Rosso to Its Expanding International Litigation and Asset Recovery Team Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Carolina M. Rosso has joined the firm as an Attorney. Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more..