Enforcing large judgments and arbitral awards for Fortune 500 companies, global banks, and sovereigns. Pursuing nominees, alter egos, and facilitators of concealment Judgment & Arbitral Award Enforcement Sequor Law represents Fortune 50 companies, global banks, large foreign corporations, and government entities in judgment and arbitral award collection matters. Decades of Experience Enforcing Complex Judgments & Awards Worldwide Sequor Law has decades of experience enforcing large judgments and arbitral awards rendered in the United States and abroad, including against large corporations and sovereigns. The firm represents Fortune 500 companies, global banks, major foreign corporations, and government entities in judgment and arbitral award collection matters. Sequor Law uses cash-flow analysis and asset tracing methods to expose concealed assets. The firm has substantial experience in post-judgment evidence gathering and recovery methods, including garnishments, freeze orders, sequestration orders, and writs of execution. In addition to identifying debtor assets, Sequor Law vigorously pursues nominees, alter egos, and others who improperly received money or property from the debtor. Where accountants, attorneys, or other asset protection specialists participate in concealment schemes, Sequor Law pursues conspiracy and aiding-and-abetting claims against those facilitators. Post-judgment and post-award enforcement has become a highly sophisticated and specialized practice, which is why leading litigators and litigation funders in the United States and abroad refer hard-earned judgments to Sequor Law for enforcement. Tracing Assets, Piercing Schemes, & Pursuing Every Responsible Party Representative Representative Cases Representation of Decedent’s Estate in Judgment Collection Sequor Law represented the personal representative of a decedent’s estate in a New York probate matter enforcing a high-value judgment against a family member who misappropriated estate assets and misused a limited power of attorney. The matter began with domestication of the New York judgment under the Florida Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act. Brazilian Judgment Holder in Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgment Sequor Law represented the holder of a high-value Brazilian Judgment in obtaining recognition under Florida’s Uniform Out-of-Country Money Judgment Act, defeating arguments that the Brazilian orders were not final because they arose from a homologated settlement. The case included depositions and trial testimony from Brazilian law experts. Defense of Regional Bank Against Customer Claims Regarding PPP Loans Sequor Law successfully defended Ocean Bank against allegations that the bank failed to properly administer PPP loan processes in connection with a forgiveness request. Defense of Regional Bank Against Assignee Regarding Overdraft Fees Sequor Law successfully defended Ocean Bank against allegations by an assignee in an assignment for the benefit of creditors that the bank improperly assessed overdraft fees and charges. Representation of Barclays Bank in Letter of Credit Dispute Sequor Law obtained summary Judgment establishing that, under UCC Article 5 and applicable law, a letter of credit issuer had no preferred rights to proceeds paid under the letter of credit. Open Edward H. Davis, Jr. Founding Shareholder edavis@sequorlaw.com (+1) 305-372-8282, Ext. 228 Open Leyza B. Florin Shareholder lflorin@sequorlaw.com (+1) 305-372-8282, Ext. 300 Open Tara J. Plochocki Partner tplochocki@sequorlaw.com (+1) 202-900-8740, Ext. 310 Open Open Key contacts Key Contacts

Tracing concealed and undervalued assets in high-net-worth matrimonial and commercial disputes. Forensic accounting, global investigators, and litigation funding support. High-Net-Worth Disputes The Sequor Law team is equipped with sophisticated investigative tools and access to a global network of investigators, accountants, and international lawyers experienced in identifying assets that were not disclosed or were grossly undervalued in matrimonial, inheritance, and other family matters. Sequor Law not only finds these assets, but works to recover concealed personal wealth for its clients. Recovering What Was Hidden: Complex Asset Tracing in High-Net-Worth Disputes High-net-worth individuals often hide assets from their spouses, particularly when anticipating divorce. Similarly, family members in control of inherited property may seek to hide it from rightful heirs. These assets are frequently placed in complex corporate structures, offshore holdings, trusts, and similar vehicles designed to keep them out of reach. Where an aggrieved spouse or heir has been left with litigation fatigue and limited resources to fund recovery efforts, Sequor Law works closely with litigation funders experienced in identifying and financing matters with strong recovery potential. Experienced family law attorneys understand that asset disclosure fraud is common in high-net-worth divorce matters. That is why Board-Certified Marital and Family Law attorneys, members of the International Academy of Family Lawyers, and members of the American College of Trial Lawyers frequently co-counsel with and refer asset investigation and recovery matters to Sequor Law. Open Edward H. Davis, Jr. Founding Shareholder edavis@sequorlaw.com (+1) 305-372-8282, Ext. 228 Open Leyza B. Florin Shareholder lflorin@sequorlaw.com (+1) 305-372-8282, Ext. 300 Open Christopher A. Noel Partner cnoel@sequorlaw.com (+1) 305-372-8282, Ext. 264 Open Open Key contacts Key Contacts

Sequor Law analyzes Florida's new 'substantial doubt' standard for recognizing foreign judgments and its implications for creditors seeking enforcement in Florida courts. New ‘Substantial Doubt’ Standard for Foreign Judgment Enforcement in Fla. Open Legal Insights Open August 7, 2018 3 minutes read Sequor Law A recent change to a state law concerning the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in Florida may make it easier to avoid payment of valid debts. By Arnoldo B. Lacayo, Juan J. Mendoza and Andres H. Sandoval Left to right: Juan Mendoza, Andres Sandoval and Arnoldo B. Lacayo, Sequor Law A recent change to a state law concerning the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in Florida may make it easier to avoid payment of valid debts. An amendment to the Uniform Out-of-Country Foreign Money- Judgment Recognition Act (the act) adds two further grounds for denial of recognition of foreign country money-judgments, potentially making it harder to recognize and enforce foreign judgments in the Sunshine State, a jurisdiction already viewed domestically and abroad as a debtor’s haven due to its generous exemptions. On March 19, House Bill No. 623 was signed into law and, per Article III, Section 9 of the Florida Constitution, went into effect on May 9. The bill adds two discretionary grounds to Section 55.605(2), Fla. Stat., to challenge recognition of a foreign money-judgment. Under these additional grounds, a Florida court need not recognize a foreign money-judgment if the judgment was rendered in circumstances that “raise substantial doubt about the integrity of the rendering court” or “the specific proceeding in the foreign court leading to the judgment was not compatible with the requirements of due process of law.” These new grounds apply only to judgments of other countries and not to judgments of other U.S. states, territories or commonwealths. Enacted in Florida in 1994, the act largely follows the 1962 version of the Uniform Foreign Money-Judgments Recognition Act (the Uniform Act), promulgated by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Law (the NCCUSL). The act applies to final, conclusive, and enforceable money-judgments of other countries. Generally, such judgments are entitled to recognition under the act; however, there are several mandatory and discretionary grounds set forth in Section 55.605, Fla. Stat., upon which a court may deny recognition. While the purpose of the act is to “provide a speedy and certain framework for recognition of foreign judgments,” Laager v. Kruger, 702 So. 2d 1362, 1363 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997), in practice, this may not be the case. At first glance, the new amendment may seem unnecessary as the act already provides avenues to challenge recognition of a foreign judgment if it is “rendered under a system which does not provide impartial tribunals or procedures compatible with the requirements of due process of law,” or if it is “obtained by fraud.” The official comment to the Uniform Act draws a distinction between the new and existing grounds by stating that the focus of these two new grounds is on the integrity and procedure of the specific court that rendered the judgment, rather than on the judicial system of the foreign country. Nevertheless, one potential concern is that the amendment invites a case-by-case review of foreign judgments, rather than further the “speedy and certain framework” the act intended to establish. This concern is compounded by the uncertainty as to the application of the nebulous “substantial doubt” standard when evaluating the “integrity” of the foreign court. Based on this language, some may argue that a debtor need only present enough evidence to raise substantial doubt in the mind of the trier of fact rather than affirmatively demonstrating fraud. Thusly, at face value, the amendment appears to welcome the enterprising debtor to argue the interpretation and limits of these new provisions in an effort to delay and possibly frustrate the recognition and enforcement of a legitimate foreign judgment. Though the “substantial doubt” standard appears broad and ambiguous, it should in fact be narrowly interpreted. The NCCUSL explains that the standard is tantamount to “a showing of corruption in the particular case that had an impact on the judgment that was rendered.” At least two courts have followed the NCCUSL’s guidance in this respect. See In re Carmona, No. 16-50155, 2018 WL 889358, at *13 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. Jan. 19, 2018); Savage v. Zelent, 243 N.C. App. 535, 545 (2015). Neither found “substantial doubt” as to the integrity of the foreign court. In short, the new amendment may leave room for abuse if courts do not adhere to the guidance of the Uniform Act and the interpretation of other courts. If so, the nebulous “substantial doubt” standard should have minimal impact for experienced creditor’s rights and asset recovery lawyers seeking to enforce valid foreign judgments entitled to recognition in Florida. Click to view full article. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open 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.. Firm News Apr 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit...

Sequor Law's Nyana Miller is selected for the International Insolvency Institute's NextGen Leadership Program Class X, recognized as a future expert in international insolvency. Nyana Miller announced as a member of Class X for the NextGen Leadership Program Open Awards & Recognition Open November 4, 2021 1 minute read Sequor Law November 4, 2021 | Stanardsville, Virginia Nyana Miller was nominated by Members of the International Insolvency Institute (III), approved by the III Executive Committee and recognized by the III Bo ard of Directors. The NextGen Class X was honored at the III’s 21st Annual Conference in New York, NY on October 18-20, 2021. These professionals represent the best of the future experts in International Insolvency. The NextGen Leadership program was established in 2012 to create an interesting, informative and valuable environment for younger professionals and academics which will provide them with an opportunity to liaise with the best people in the world in the insolvency area, the Members of the International Insolvency Institute. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open 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.. Firm News Apr 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit...

Edward H. Davis Jr. discusses cross-border financial fraud, asset tracing, and modern asset recovery challenges in his WWL Thought Leaders Global Elite Q&A. WWL Thought Leaders Global Elite - Edward H. Davis Jr. Q&A Open Awards & Recognition Open August 25, 2022 2 minutes read Sequor Law In the complex world of cross-border financial fraud and asset tracing , experience and strategic insight are essential. In his ThoughtLeaders interview (featured in the Sequor Law article PDF), Founding Shareholder Edward H. Davis Jr. shares his perspective on what drives modern asset recovery practice and the evolving challenges practitioners face as fraudsters exploit increasingly sophisticated structures and technologies. Davis’s reflections are grounded in more than three decades of international litigation and investigative work representing victims of fraud , corruption , Ponzi schemes and other misappropriations of funds around the globe . The article weaves together Ed’s professional journey with grounded commentary on the issues shaping asset recovery today. He explains why he chose this practice area — to make a measurable difference in people’s lives by unravelling the complex legal and factual webs fraudsters set up to conceal assets. He also describes the kinds of cases that regularly come across his desk, noting that while traditional investment and corporate fraud remain core concerns, crypto-asset and internet-based frauds are increasingly front and center. A recurring theme of the piece is the interplay between legal systems and global reality. Davis identifies jurisdictional hurdles — including the reluctance of some legal systems to treat information as an asset recoverable in a tracing exercise — as among the greatest obstacles in international practice. This observation underscores the fact that asset recovery is as much about navigating foreign legal cultures and procedural norms as it is about understanding the underlying wrongdoing. The interview also touches on how technological tools are reshaping the practice. Davis points out that while emerging technologies are not yet “game changers,” they are helping practitioners uncover bank relationships and other data that were previously more difficult to access — leveling the playing field in key respects. Finally, Davis offers practical career insights for young lawyers interested in the field, emphasizing that direct experience and mentorship are irreplaceable for mastering the judgment and tactical skills required in high-stakes, highly international disputes . For a frontline look at the mindset and practical considerations of one of the field’s most experienced asset recovery lawyers , we encourage you to read the full interview in the PDF below. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open 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.. Firm News Apr 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit...

Sequor Law's Joseph B. Rome wins ThoughtLeaders4 FIRE's 2nd Future Thought Leaders Essay Competition, with his essay on the future of fraud, insolvency, and asset recovery in 2023. Joseph B. Rome Wins ThoughtLeaders4 FIRE Essay Competition Open Awards & Recognition Open January 19, 2023 1 minute read Sequor Law Congratulations to our very own Joseph B. Rome who was selected by ThoughtLeaders4 FIRE as the winner of its 2nd Edition of the Future Thought Leaders Essay Competition ! His essay, which will be published in an upcoming issue of the magazine, addresses the topic of where the industry is headed in 2023 by focusing on N Click the image below to read his full essay. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open 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.. Firm News Apr 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit...

The foreign representative of bankrupt Brazilian businessman Daniel Birmann, accused of concealing assets and smuggling a $30M yacht into Brazil, files Chapter 15 recognition proceedings in Miami. Foreign representative of Brazilian businessman accused of smuggling yacht files Chapter 15 in Miami Open In the News Open November 9, 2018 3 minutes read Sequor Law By Benjamin Clarke The foreign representative of a long-time bankrupt businessman accused of concealing his assets and smuggling a US$30 million yacht into Brazil has filed Chapter 15 recognition proceedings in Miami. On 8 November, Fernando Correia of Rio de Janeiro-based Carlos Magno Nery & Meiros filed a petition in the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida, asking the court to recognize the Brazilian involuntary liquidations of copper manufacturer SAM Indústrias, its parent company Boulder Participações, and Boulder’s majority shareholder Daniel Birmann. Birmann and the two companies have been in insolvency proceedings for over a decade, after SAM defaulted on 40.1 million reais (US$14.5 million) worth of debentures back in December 2004. Back then a Rio court issued a bankruptcy order against SAM under the Brazilian Bankruptcy Law after it also closed down its principal place of business. Private pension fund Braslight, which held the defaulted notes, filed a petition for the involuntary liquidation of SAM and asked the court to extend the order to Boulder and Birmann – as the ultimate beneficial owner of the companies. The Brazilian court found that SAM’s main assets were 135 million reais (US$36.05 million) worth of loans to Boulder, and made the requested order in February 2008. The court said that Birmann had caused SAM’s collapse by transferring all of its available funds to Boulder and leaving it without sufficient liquid assets to pay creditors. Boulder then used the funds to make additional intercompany loans to Brazilian bank Banco Arbi, which is owned by Birmann’s family. Braslight was made the judicial administrator by the court, but last year Head Judge Maria Ruckerreplaced the pension fund with Carlos Magno, noting the proceedings had “not had an actual solution for several years”. Fraudulent transfers As well as the bankruptcy proceedings, the Brazilian Securities Exchange Commission (CVM) also launched an action against Birmann. According to a declaration filed by Correia in the US court, the CVM found that the loans extended to Banco Arbi were contracted under much more favorable conditions than those offered by the market and concluded that Birmann’s actions were an “abuse of control”. It imposed a fine of 234 million reais (US464.88 million) on Birmann – “the largest fine ever imposed to an individual by the CVM” according to Correia. “During the bankruptcy proceedings, Daniel Birmann was required to disclose of his assets to the Brazilian court, which he has failed to do,” Correia says. “Instead, it appears that he has fraudulently transferred assets to his family members in order to avoid enforcement of the bankruptcy order and to conceal his assets from creditors. Brazil’s department of revenue discovered a further attempt to hide assets in 2012 when it seized a yacht called “Big Aron” in the city of Salvador. The yacht was registered in the name of Isle of Man-incorporated company Tango Bravo, which had applied for a tax-free admission on the grounds it was a non-resident. But the authorities suspected that Brazilian resident Birmann was the actual owner and concluded that with Tango Bravo he had “smuggled” the yacht into the country. The name “Big Aron” caught the attention of the authorities because Birmann’s father was named “Aron Birmann” and, upon further analysis, the department of revenue learned that Birmann and his family were consistently registered as guests on trips in Brazil and elsewhere. After conducting investigations, the CVM found that Tango Bravo was held by another entity in the Cayman Islands, which in turn was held by a Panama-incorporated entity with a single shareholder: Birmann’s mother. With a value of 60 million reais (US$30.1 million), the CVM sought to levy on the yacht and use the proceeds to pay off the fine it had imposed on Birmann. A federal judge in Rio, Judge Fatima Sequeira made such a seizure order in 2015. But the following year, the department of revenue discovered furniture and appliances had been “stolen” from the yacht and transported to a Banco Arbi address. Public prosecutors were informed, and a criminal lawsuit for embezzlement and misappropriation was filed against Birmann last year. With counsel from Gregory Grossman of Sequor Law , Correia filed the Chapter 15 proceedings in Miami “in furtherance of a worldwide pursuit of assets” to satisfy unpaid claims. Birmann has a Florida driver’s license listing an address in Florida, Correia says, and the debtors’ have assets located in the United States. Judge Robert Mark has listed the matter for a hearing on 4 December. In the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida, Miami Division In re SAM Industrias S.A.; Boulder Participacoes LTDA; and Daniel Benasayag Birmann Judge Robert Mark Counsel to the foreign representative Sequor Law Partner Gregory Grossman with Nyana Miller in Miami Foreign representative to SAM Industrias, Boulder Participacoes and Daniel Birmann Carlos Magno Nery & Meiros Partner Fernando Correia in Rio de Janeiro To view full article, click here. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open 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.. Firm News Apr 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit...

Sequor Law's Leyza B. Florin and Christopher Noel analyze how US courts are adopting the Judicial Insolvency Network's framework for cross-border coordination in international insolvency matters. Asset recovery column: Globalisation catches up with the US insolvency courts Open Legal Insights Open September 17, 2019 5 minutes read Sequor Law Shareholder Leyza B. Florin and attorney Christopher Noel from Sequor Law in Miami discuss recent developments in coordination and communication between courts handling cross-border insolvencies. In today’s ever-globalized world, courts are progressively recognizing the need for cross-border coordination and cooperation when dealing with insolvency matters. Earlier this summer, the US Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware adopted the Judicial Insolvency Network’s (JIN) Modalities of Court-to-Court Communication (the Modalities ). The Delaware court’s adoption of the Modalities followed its February 2017 promulgation of Part X: Guidelines for Communication and Cooperation Between Courts in Cross-Border Insolvency Matters (the Guidelines ). The Guidelines and Modalities represent an unprecedented attempt at creating a unified framework for coordination and cooperation, and in some cases, joint hearings. In the past, coordination and cooperation among US bankruptcy judges and courts abroad was based on section 1525 of the US Bankruptcy Code (Cooperation and direct communication between the court and foreign courts or foreign representatives), and it was accomplished on an basis, which was ultimately left up to the specific judges handling the cross-border insolvency matter. This article examines the lead-up to the District of Delaware’s adoption of the Modalities, the Modalities’ goals in facilitating cross-border communication in insolvency matters, and forecasts the implications of the Modalities upon – and assuming – their addition to the District of Delaware Local Rules of Civil Practice and Procedure. The beginnings of global cooperation The District of Delaware and the Supreme Court of Singapore announced the formal implementation of the Guidelines on 1 February 2017. The Guidelines are the result of work by judges around the world – judges in Australia, Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands, Canada, the Cayman Islands, England and Wales, Singapore, and the United States all contributed to their development beginning at the 2016 JIN meeting in Singapore. To date, they have been adopted by some of the busiest bankruptcy and insolvency tribunals around the world (see list at foot of article). The goal of adopting the Guidelines was “to improve in the interests of all stakeholders the efficiency and effectiveness of cross-border proceedings relating to insolvency or adjustment of debt opened in more than one jurisdiction by enhancing coordination and cooperation amongst courts”. Ultimately, the Guidelines are meant to benefit all stakeholders in cross-border insolvencies, by improving efficiency in the insolvency process and reducing litigation costs. The Guidelines comprise an introduction setting forth objectives, 14 enumerated guidelines providing guidance on protocols, and an appendix addressing joint hearings. Delaware moves the ball On 25 July 2019, the JIN announced its adoption of the Modalities. On the same day, Judge Christopher Sontchi , chief judge of the US Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware, entered an order adopting the Modalities on an interim basis, pending the District Court’s annual review of its Local Rules. This means the District of Delaware will now follow the Modalities when dealing with cross-border insolvency matters, even before they are formally adopted into the Local Rules. The Modalities include guidance concerning the designation of a so-called facilitator, the initiation of communications between judges, arrangements for those communications, and the actual communications between judges. Each of these areas of guidance will be discussed below. Laying the groundwork The Modalities apply to all direct communications between courts in cross-border insolvency proceedings. They also govern the mechanics of communication between courts in parallel proceedings, such as a Chapter 15 proceeding in the US where there is a simultaneous foreign main proceeding abroad. In general, the Modalities anticipate that a judge in a matter with cross-border elements (the initiating judge) will attempt to communicate with other judges and courts considering the same insolvency matter (the receiving judge). To accomplish this objective, courts are now requested to publish information regarding facilitators so that there is a clear line of communication. Among the information in the facilitator, publication will be the facilitator’s identity (the District of Delaware has identified its clerk of court to act in this role) and the language for the initial communication, as well as what technology is available to facilitate communication. This basic information was not necessarily easily obtained in the past, and a clear designation of with whom to communicate and how those communications should be made, will alone facilitate greater coordination and cooperation among those involved in cross-border insolvencies. Saying hello Once the groundwork for communication is established, and there is a clear line of communication with a court’s facilitator, the judges involved in parallel cross-border insolvency proceedings should exchange relevant information to keep the line of communication open. The initiating judge should provide basic information to the receiving judge, such as the facilitator’s contact information, the initiating judge’s contact information, information concerning the matter before the initiating judge, the nature of the matter, whether the parties before the initiating judge have consented to the communication, and the specific issues upon which communication is sought. Once this initial communication is accomplished, then the facilitator should step in and assist with coordinating between the initiating and the receiving judges. Setting a date After a line of communication is open, the initiating and receiving judges’ facilitators are free to communicate and arrange for the two judges to speak, with or without the presence of counsel or the parties. The initiating and receiving judges have great leeway in how communication is made, and the Modalities provide only that the two judges should be satisfied with the arrangements, including appropriate translation services and protocols to communicate confidential information via a secure method. The first meeting and ongoing discussions. After the necessary protocols are in place, the Modalities suggest that the initiating and receiving judges communicate in accordance with the Guidelines. Additionally, the Modalities provide that, should the two judges so wish, they may discontinue the use of their respective facilitators to allow for an efficient line of direct communication. This may also be done without the presence of counsel or the parties. Ultimately, the Modalities’ goal is to allow easy, efficient, and productive communication between the initiating and receiving judges so as to improve efficiency. A globalized world Now that the District of Delaware has, at least initially, adopted the Modalities, it is foreseeable that other US Bankruptcy courts will follow suit. The number of cross-border insolvency proceedings that could (and will) benefit from increased coordination and cooperation across borders is ever growing. All parties – creditors, debtors, bankruptcy estates, and insolvency tribunals – stand to benefit from the Modalities when handling cross-border insolvencies. Moving forward, the potential impact on cross-border insolvency practice is great. Both insolvency courts and practitioners alike will need to work together to implement the Modalities and Guidelines so that all involved are familiar and comfortable working with this new framework. Additionally, through ongoing efforts, cross-border insolvency matters should become more streamlined and efficient. The free flow of information will take much of the uncertainty out of cross-border situations where multiple parallel proceedings are involved. In sum, the Modalities and Guidelines now facilitate the insolvency practice’s ongoing evolution in an ever-more-globalised world. Courts Adopting the Guidelines for Communication and Cooperation Between Courts in Cross-Border Insolvency Matters The US Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware The Supreme Court of Singapore The US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York The Supreme Court of Bermuda The Chancery Division of England & Wales The Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court The Supreme Court of New South Wales The US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida The Seoul Bankruptcy Court The Grand Court of the Cayman Islands The Commercial List Users’ Committee of the Superior Court of Justice – Ontario (Commercial List) The District Court Midden-Nederland, in the Netherlands 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 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.. Firm News Apr 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit...

Chambers & Partners ranked firm with Band 1 attorneys in Asset Recovery and Bankruptcy Litigation. ICC FraudNet member. Board-certified in international litigation. Relentless. Global. Pursuit. Sequor Law is an international law firm representing financial institutions, sovereign governments and state-owned enterprises, public and non-public companies, insolvency practitioners and individual clients in the areas of asset recovery, financial fraud, insolvency and financial services litigation. 25 25 25 years years years After years of experience in powerhouse firms, Founding Shareholders Edward H. Davis Jr. and Gregory S. Grossman recognized a distinct need in the international Asset Recovery and Cross-Border Insolvency market for more specialized legal services. In 2000, they founded the specialized international firm now known as Sequor Law. The firm grew quickly, bringing together an award-winning, multilingual team that serves as thought leaders in the field. With a proven record of success, Sequor Law represents fraud victims, court-appointed fiduciaries, domestic and international corporations and financial institutions, and government entities. The firm also draws on a powerful global network of professionals and resources that work relentlessly for our clients. Certified Fraud Examiner (CFE) since 2004 Issued by Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE): Certified Fraud Examiners understand how fraud is committed, detected, and prevented. Individuals who have obtained the CFE credential understand the underlying factors that motivate people to commit fraud and are trained to identify red flags that indicate evidence of fraud and fraud risk. They are able to trace fraudulent transactions, interview suspects to obtain information and confessions, write investigation reports, advise clients on their findings, and testify at trial. Global Restructuring Review Sequor Law is proud to be recognized in Global Restructuring Review’s GRR 100, featuring the world’s leading firms for cross-border restructuring and insolvency matters. The Florida Bar - International Litigation and Arbitration Sequor Law has become the Florida firm with the most attorneys who are board certified in International Litigation and Arbitration . Approved by the Florida Supreme Court in 2020, International Litigation and Arbitration is a new certification program that recognizes attorneys’ special knowledge, skills, and proficiency in various areas of law, professionalism, and ethics in practice. Chambers and Partners Chambers provides insights into the world’s leading lawyers, based on extensive research and interviews with clients, attorneys, and third-party experts. Chambers and Partners’ USA and Litigation Support Guides ranked the firm: Band 2 – Bankruptcy Litigation , 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025. Band 2 – Asset Tracing & Recovery (Global-Wide) , 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024. Band 1 – Asset Tracing & Recovery (Global-Wide) , 2025. Individual Achievements: Gregory S. Grossman : Bankruptcy Litigation Leyza B. Florin: Bankruptcy Litigation and Bankruptcy Restructuring Fernando J. Menendez, Jr .: Bankruptcy Litigation Edward H. Davis, Jr. : Bankruptcy Litigation Who's Who Legal Who’s Who Legal recognized Sequor attorneys and professionals as: Thought Leaders Global Elite – Asset Recovery, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025. Expert – Asset Recovery, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025. Thought Leaders and Experts are selected based on client and peer recommendations, the attorney’s track record, and a rigorous evaluation process. No more than 5% of practitioners in any WWL global practice area guide are selected as Global Elite Thought Leaders. Latinvex Top Latin American Law Firms Latinvex 2022 and 2021 Top Latin American Law Firms named Sequor Law among the top 50 firms and ranked the firm #3 in Litigation . Shareholder Leyza Florin Blanco was also named among the Top 100 Female Lawyers in Latin America by Latinvex in the 2022, 2023, 2024, and 2025 Editions. Nyana Abreu Miller was also named among the Top 100 Female Lawyers in Latin America in the 2023 Edition. Based on an exclusive Latinvex survey, these annual rankings are determined using a combination of factors, including value, prominence and scope of work, and references among clients and peers. Super Lawyers - Rising Stars Lists Ten Sequor attorneys have been selected to the Super Lawyers or Rising Stars lists . Most recently, Christopher A. Noel was named a Rising Star in the 2023 and 2025 editions of Super Lawyers, as well as Juan J. Mendoza in the 2025 edition. Selection is based on a careful nomination and vetting process using peer evaluations and independent research. Only lawyers in the top 5% of their state are selected as Super Lawyers, and only 2.5% of top lawyers, who are 40 years old or younger or in practice for 10 years or less, are selected as Rising Stars. Best Lawyers® - Best Law Firms Sequor Law earned 11 rankings across several of the firm’s key practice areas in the U.S. News’ 2020 and 2025 edition of “Best Lawyers®” “Best Law Firms”. U.S. News’ “Best Lawyers®” “Best Law Firms” is a leading survey of lawyers worldwide that ranks firms in 75 practice areas nationally. A tiering system is used to rank overall scores based on quantitative and qualitative data Best Lawyers® Sequor Law is pleased to announce that more than four of the firm's partners were recognized in multiple categories in the 2025 32nd Edition of The Best Lawyers of America®. Founding Shareholder Edward Davis was recognized in Bet-the-Company Litigation , Commercial Litigation , International Arbitration – Commercial and Litigation – Banking and Finance , Founding Shareholder Gregory Grossman was recognized in Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law and Litigation – Bankruptcy , Shareholder Leyza B. Florin was recognized in Commercial Litigation and Litigation – Bankruptcy and Shareholder Fernando Menendez was recognized in Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law . Leyza Florin Blanco was also recognized as one of Florida’s Top 100 Lawyers and Top 50 Women Lawyers in 2023. LawDragon 500 Since 2020, four Sequor shareholders have been recognized in the Lawdragon 500 Leading U.S. Bankruptcy and Restructuring Lawyers . Edward H. Davis, Jr. was recognized in the areas of Creditors’ Rights, Asset Recovery, and Financial Fraud Litigation; Gregory S. Grossman, was recognized in the areas of Bankruptcy & Insolvency Litigation, including Cross-Border matters; Leyza Florin Blanco was recognized in the areas of Bankruptcy & Financial Restructuring, particularly in litigation; and Arnoldo “Arnie” Lacayo was recognized in the areas of Financial Fraud, Asset Recovery, and International Insolvency Litigation. Lawdragon’s 2020 U.S. guide recognized 294 U.S.-based lawyers in the Global guide due to their work in cross-border cases and 500 U.S. all-stars, whose focus was primarily national. Latin Lawyer Edward H. Davis, Jr. was named among 100 Leading Lawyers by LatinLawyer in 2023. LatinLawyer is the definitive source of news, analysis, and research for the regional legal community. South Florida Legal Guide South Florida Legal Guide named Sequor Law’s shareholders among the region’s Top Lawyers and Up and Comers in 2021 . Top Lawyers are nominated by their peers based on their extensive experience and outstanding record of success. Also peer-nominated, Up and Comers are distinguished as the next generation of leaders in the South Florida legal communities with a minimum of 10 years in their practice. Accolades Sequor Law attorneys are regularly recognized nationally and internationally for our extensive experience and global network within the industry. The following are some awards and distinctions Sequor Law and our attorneys have been honored to receive: We cross borders.

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 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.. Firm News Apr 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit...

Sequor Law's Leyza B. Florin and Carolina Goncalves summarize UNCITRAL's Model Law on Recognition and Enforcement of Insolvency-Related Judgments and its role in cross-border cases. The UN’s latest attempt to assist international insolvency practitioners Open Legal Insights Open July 13, 2020 5 minutes read Sequor Law Miami-based Sequor Law shareholder Leyza B. Florin and attorney Carolina Goncalves summarise the UNCITRAL Working Group’s Model Law on the Recognition and Enforcement of Insolvency-Related Judgments. As the world’s economy becomes increasingly transnational, and debtors, their assets, and creditors are scattered across multiple jurisdictions, the need for consistency and efficiency in the cross-border administration of insolvency proceedings has become more pressing. Variations among legal systems have resulted in inconsistent, duplicative, time-consuming and costly efforts to recognise and enforce insolvency-related judgments in different jurisdictions, creating legal uncertainty and other complications in the administration of cross-border insolvency proceedings. The United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) attempted to foster international cooperation in the administration of cross-border insolvencies through its Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency (MLCBI), but there remained an ambiguity in the recognition and enforcement of judgments related to insolvency proceedings, especially where enforcement of the foreign judgment was inconsistent with local law. The Model Law As a result, in 2014, UNCITRAL gave a mandate to its Working Group V on Insolvency Law to develop a model law that specifically provides for the recognition and enforcement of insolvency-related judgments. The Working Group collaborated with UNCITRAL’s 60 member states and the representatives of 31 observer states and 34 inter-governmental and non-governmental organisations to develop the Model Law on Recognition and Enforcement of Insolvency-Related Judgments . On 2 July 2018, UNCITRAL adopted the Model Law, which is designed to address both the gap in international law regarding the cross-border recognition and enforcement of judgments that arise as a consequence of, or are materially associated with, insolvency proceedings; and the uncertainty in interpreting certain provisions of the MLCBI “in terms of providing the necessary authority for such recognition and enforcement as a form of relief available on recognition of a foreign insolvency proceeding.” How the Model Law works The Model Law seeks to address these issues through its primary characteristics: harmonisation and flexibility. It offers enacting states a “simple, straightforward and harmonised procedure for recognition and enforcement of insolvency-related judgments” while remaining flexible in its integration into each enacting state’s legal system. Importantly, the Model Law is intended to supplement the MLCBI, and in fact mirrors its provisions and definitions in many respects, as well as the existing legal frameworks of the enacting states. For example, as international insolvency practitioners, we know the terminology used in insolvency proceedings can vary by jurisdiction. Where a term or expression is likely to vary among enacting states, the Model Law offers more inclusive defined terms, such as “insolvency proceeding” (as opposed to liquidation, reorganisation or bankruptcy) and “insolvency representative” (rather than trustee, foreign representative, liquidator, judicial administrator etc). It also describes terms or expressions in brackets as placeholders for jurisdiction-specific information – like the name of the court, body, or authority designated to perform the specified function – allowing the enacting state’s legislators to use the term specific to that jurisdiction. Additionally, the Model Law offers optional provisions, such as one allowing the enacting state to refuse the recognition of an insolvency-related judgment when it originates from a state whose “insolvency proceeding” would not be subject to recognition under the MLCBI. The Model Law also contains two noteworthy exceptions to recognising and enforcing insolvency-related judgments. Enacting states may refrain from taking any action that would be “manifestly contrary” to their public policy. Further, the Model Law enumerates the following specific grounds for the refusal of recognition and enforcement: improper notice to the defendant in the proceeding that gave rise to the insolvency-related judgment; the judgment was obtained by fraud; the judgment is inconsistent with a judgment entered in the enacting state involving the same parties; the judgment is consistent with an earlier judgment entered in another state involving the same parties and subject matter; recognition and enforcement would interfere with the administration of the debtor’s insolvency proceeding; the judgment materially affects the rights of creditors generally and their interests were not adequately protected in the proceeding that led to the judgment; and the court issuing the judgment did not have jurisdiction. Defining an “insolvency-related judgment” As its name suggests, the Model Law’s distinguishing feature is that it applies to “insolvency-related judgments”, which previously had not been fully addressed by other UNCITRAL insolvency texts. The Model Law provides a broad definition of “judgment” to include any decision, such as a decree, order, or determination of costs and expenses, “issued by a court or administrative authority”. To fall within the Model Law’s scope, an insolvency-related judgment must “arise… as a consequence of or [be] materially associated with an insolvency proceeding”, and be “issued on or after the commencement of that insolvency proceeding”. Importantly, the judgment must have been rendered in a proceeding in a state other than the enacting state in which recognition and enforcement are sought; the location of the insolvency proceedings to which the judgment relates is immaterial. The Model Law’s Guide to Enactment provides a non-exhaustive list of judgments that fall within the definition of “insolvency-related judgment”, including judgments dealing with the constitution and disposal of assets in the insolvency estate; judgments determining whether a transaction involving the debtors or assets of its insolvency estate should be avoided because it was a preferential transaction or a transaction at an undervalue; judgments involving a director or representative liability for the debtor’s actions while insolvent or in the period approaching insolvency; judgments determining that sums are owed to or by the debtor or the insolvency estate; judgments confirming or varying a plan of reorganization or liquidation or approving a voluntary or out-of-court restructuring agreement; and judgments for the examination of a director of the debtor, where that director is located in a third jurisdiction. Decisions or orders commencing insolvency proceedings and interim measures of protection are explicitly excluded from the Model Law’s scope. Further, it is unclear whether insolvency-related arbitral decisions are considered “insolvency-related judgments” under the Model Law, as they may not come from an “administrative authority.” The Model Law’s impact and success While it is still too early to evaluate the Model Law’s impact and success, its design as a supplement to the MLCBI and the enacting state’s existing legal structure, rather than an overhaul of existing insolvency frameworks, suggests that it will succeed (at least partially) in making the recognition and enforcement of insolvency-related judgments more consistent and efficient. Moreover, though the Model Law intends to respect the insolvency schemes of the respective enacting states, UNCITRAL cautions against excessively modifying the Model Law and frequently invoking its exceptions. That said, enacting states are still free to make the necessary modifications to protect their own legal processes and domestic creditors, which could result in the very complications the Model Law was intended to eliminate. The Model Law’s success also depends on the number of states that enact it. By way of comparison, over 45 jurisdictions have adopted the MLCBI, including Australia, Canada, Colombia, Japan, Kenya, Mexico, New Zealand, the Republic of Korea, Singapore, South Africa, the UK, BVI, Gibraltar, and the US; however, several European nations have not adopted it and are governed by the separate EU regulation (EC No. 1346/2000) on insolvency proceedings. This same EU regulation provides for the recognition and enforcement of judgments that “derive directly from and are closely linked to… insolvency proceedings”. Because this EU regulation seems to address the recognition and enforcement of insolvency-related judgments, and several European nations have opted to implement its framework and rejected the MLCBI, it is unlikely that these same nations will adopt the Model Law. Finally, as mentioned above, it is unclear whether insolvency-related arbitral decisions fall within the scope of the Model Law. As the law develops and the Working Group continues to issue guidance on its enactment, practitioners should expect to see developments on this issue. The Model Law and its accompanying Guide to Enactment are available here . Click here to read the original article . Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open 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.. Firm News Apr 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit...

Six Sequor Law attorneys are recognized in the 2023 SuperLawyers guide. Christopher A. Noel is named a Rising Star, honoring the top up-and-coming lawyers in the United States. Various Attorneys Recognized by SuperLawyers 2023 Open Awards & Recognition Open June 26, 2023 1 minute read Sequor Law Sequor Law is proud to announce that six attorneys have been recognized in the 2023 edition of SuperLawyers, a guide to the top lawyers in the United States. Congratulations to Christopher A. Noel Noel for being named a Rising Star, an honor given to the top up-and-coming lawyers in the country. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open 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.. Firm News Apr 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit...