Sequor Law's Leyza B. Florin, Andrew Dawson, and Greg Grossman examine how Florida's bankruptcy courts have become leaders in Chapter 15 asset recovery, published in Asset Recovery Magazine. Asset Recovery Magazine – Florida Leads the Way in Development of Chapter 15 Jurisprudence Open Legal Insights Open August 30, 2019 9 minutes read Sequor Law By Leyza B. Florin , Andrew B. Dawson and Greg S. Grossman Chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code has become a powerful asset recovery tool, and the Florida bankruptcy courts have been leading the way in this development. The Southern District of Florida has seen more Chapter 15 lings than any court other than the Southern District of New York, and many of these Florida Chapter 15 cases have been focused on assisting foreign trustees and liquidators track down and recover assets in the United States. Our team at Sequor Law in Miami has alone led over forty chapter 15 cases. While Chapter 15 is not a new tool—it is approaching its fourteenth birthday—it is, like many a teenager, under-appreciated and at times misunderstood. This is in part because Chapter 15 is not really “bankruptcy” in the sense that it does not create a bankruptcy estate or appoint a trustee. Instead, Chapter 15 provides a procedure to assist trustees administer foreign insolvency cases whose cross- border estates reach into the United States. The underappreciation also stems in part because Chapter 15’s substantive contours remain unknown, as it is primarily a procedural vehicle with minimal substantive constraints. Finally, because Chapter 15 requires U.S. bankruptcy courts to interface with foreign insolvency proceedings, there has been a great deal of uncertainty as to how open courts would be to cooperating with foreign insolvency proceedings, particularly when those foreign proceedings involve insolvency laws that are importantly different from U.S. bankruptcy law in substance and process. One common concern when Chapter 15 was rst enacted in 2008 was that U.S. bankruptcy courts might be reluctant to cooperate with foreign proceedings—or that they would cooperate inconsistently—in the face of foreign insolvency laws. Florida bankruptcy courts have in recent years played a key role in the development of Chapter 15. It is perhaps no surprise that courts here have been leaders in this arena, particularly as to cross-border insolvencies originating from Latin and South America. These courts have played important roles in establishing precedent for inter- American cooperation and assistance in this still-developing area of law. This article will discuss three recent decisions that highlight developments that may be of particular interest in asset recovery efforts. Chapter 15: A Bankruptcy without a Bankruptcy Estate Chapter 15 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code provides a powerful tool kit for bankruptcy trustees and liquidators, but it is not itself a “bankruptcy” case. It does not open a full bankruptcy proceeding or create an estate, as would happen in a typical corporate bankruptcy case. Instead, Chapter 15 creates a process to assist the representative of a foreign proceeding, whether that be a debtor- in-possession, trustee, monitor, or other official. Chapter 15 permits that foreign representative to open a case in the bankruptcy court in order to seek assistance within the United States, with that assistance ranging from discovery orders to asset turnover orders. The bankruptcy court’s threshold function is to determine whether to recognize foreign proceeding, either a foreign main proceeding (i.e., one led where the debtor has its “center of main interests”) or foreign nonmain proceeding (i.e., one led where the debtor has an establishment). The court then has discretion to fashion assistance. Thus, there is no actual “debtor” in the Chapter 15 case and no estate is created. Whereas a traditional bankruptcy case can be a cost-intensive and disruptive endeavor—trustees are appointed, claims must be processed, assets liquidated and distributed, etc. —Chapter 15, in contrast, is not a traditional bankruptcy case. Rather, it is an ancillary case in aid of the foreign bankruptcy proceeding. It is thus more exible and less onerous than a traditional bankruptcy case. The main questions in these ancillary cases concern what aid is available to the trustees of the foreign insolvency cases. Chapter 15 provides some very speci c procedures designed to facilitate that cross-border assistance, e.g., authorizing judge-to-judge communications, and it provides a non-exclusive list of relief the U.S. bankruptcy court can grant to the foreign representative. As with any relatively new legislation, there is a lot of uncertainty as to the extent of that relief and to the standards for granting that relief. The uncertainty in Chapter 15 has an additional complicating factor due to its cross-border nature: would U.S. bankruptcy courts extend relief to foreign bankruptcy proceedings that differ from U.S. bankruptcy law and procedures? Three Florida cases brought by Sequor Law on behalf of foreign representatives, illustrate these issues and show how the Florida bankruptcy courts have helped fashion answers and standards. Who is the Foreign “Debtor”: In re Petroforte The first case is by now well known in the cross-border insolvency world so will receive only a cursory treatment; however, it would be remiss to exclude the case altogether as it has had important rami cations throughout the Chapter 15 jurisprudence. Petroforte was one of Brazil’s largest gas and ethanol distributors before entering bankruptcy. That liquidation had uncovered evidence of fraudulent transfers made to several entities, which provided the basis for the Brazilian court to enter ex parte an order extending the bankruptcy case to include the transferees. The Brazilian trustees commenced a Chapter 15 proceeding in the Southern District of Florida to seek discovery to assist the Brazilian liquidation. Some of these discovery targets objected on two main grounds: first, the argued that the Chapter 15 court should refuse to recognize the Brazilian extension order on public policy grounds; second, they argued that the foreign representative could not use Chapter 15 to order discovery against the transferees because they were not “debtors”. In what is now a widely-cited case (In re Petroforte Brasileiro de Petroleo Ltda. , 542 B.R. 899 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 2015)), Judge Robert Mark rejected the first argument. He noted that U.S. courts grant a similar type of relief under the equitable remedy of substantive consolidation, and thus the Brazilian extension order was not substantively offensive as a matter of public policy. As to the ex parte nature of the proceedings, he acknowledged that this differs from U.S. procedure, which would have provided the remedy of substantive consolidation only upon an open hearing; however, he noted that the parties had the opportunity to be heard at the appellate level in Brazil. Consequently, the Brazilian proceeding did not offend U.S. public policy. As to the scope of discovery assistance under Chapter 15, the court had to interpret the scope of “debtor” under section 1521(a)(4), which provides that a court may authorize the “the examination of witnesses, the taking of evidence or the delivery of information concerning the debtor’s assets, affairs, rights, obligations or liabilities.” Judge Mark held that the entities that were subject to the Brazilian extension order were “debtors” subject to section 1521’s discovery powers. As to third parties who were not subject to the Brazilian extension order, the bankruptcy court in Petroforte held the trustee may be entitled to broad discovery to the extent the debtor is a majority stockholder in the non-debtor discovery target. Such broad discovery “allows the Trustee to determine whether the stock, which is an asset of the estate, has sufficient value to induce the Trustee to take control of the entity, and attempt to derive value by selling or liquidating the entity.” Broad Discovery Relief: In re SAM Industrias, S.A. In re SAM Industrias, S.A ., 2019 WL 1012790 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. March 1, 2019), built upon the foundation laid in Petroforte. In Petroforte, Judge Mark also suggested an alternative basis for ordering broad investigation into third party transactions in situations in which the third parties were actually involved in the fraudulent transfer or had otherwise engaged in wrongdoing: “The Trustee’s Supplemental Response failed to establish any actual involvement in the Plant Transaction or any wrongdoing by any of the Third Party Targets.” The court, though, did not further discuss this alternative ground. The issue arose in SAM Industrias when the foreign representative of the Brazilian liquidation led a Chapter 15 in the Southern District of Florida to investigate potential fraudulent transferees identified by the Brazilian courts. The Brazilian courts had found that the debtor had undisclosed interests in certain corporate entities, which he had concealed by transferring to family members. The foreign representative, accordingly, sought the Chapter 15 court’s assistance in examining these family members, who were not themselves debtors in Brazil, and in examining certain non-debtor corporate entities. The debtor objected to this assistance, arguing that the requested discovery assistance falls outside the scope of Chapter 15’s relief because the discovery targets were not debtors in Brazil. As to the family members, the Chapter 15 court examined the Brazilian court record carefully and concluded that discovery was appropriate as to those family members identified as transferees of the debtor’s property. The foreign representative, accordingly, was entitled to discover information related to the transferees’ corporate and financial affairs. As to the non-debtor corporate entities, the foreign representative was entitled to broad discovery not only as to those entities in which the debtor had a majority interest but also in those entities found to have participated in the debtor’s asset concealment scheme. Again, in defining the scope of relief available to the foreign representative, the Chapter 15 court examined the findings of the Brazilian courts. The Brazilian courts had found that the debtor had concealed assets through certain corporate pass- throughs owned and controlled by the debtor. The foreign representative was thus entitled to discovery related to these corporate pass-throughs. The foreign representative, though, was not entitled to discovery related to the non-debtor entities whose connections to the debtor had not yet been established in the Brazilian courts. Accordingly, the court concluded that the foreign representative is not entitled to “carte-blanche in his inquiries of non-debtors,” but that he is entitled to obtain information narrowly tailored “to discover ‘the legal entities created in purely fictional form’ which are part of a ‘complex corporate structure’ obscuring” the debtor’s ownership of corporate assets. The Foreign Revenue Rule: In re Dixon In re Dixon (Case No. 16-bk-02453, M.D. Fla. March 23, 2016) illustrates Chapter 15’s exibility, as it required the court to consider a novel application of the Foreign Revenue Rule to a Canadian trustee’s request for assistance. The Canadian debtors commenced proceedings in Canada under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act. The foreign representative subsequently led a Chapter 15 proceeding in the Middle District of Florida, seeking discovery assistance related to the debtor’s assets in the United States. When the foreign representative sought authorization to sell the debtors’ U.S. property in aid of the Canadian liquidation, the debtors led their own bankruptcy case under Chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code and later sought to dismiss the Chapter 15 proceedings. They argued that the Chapter 15 petition would violate the Foreign Revenue Rule. The Foreign Revenue Rule is “a long- standing common law rule that prevents the courts of one sovereign from enforcing or adjudicating tax claims from another sovereign.” Here, the debtors’ principal obligations were unpaid tax debts owed in Canada. Republic of Honduras vs. Philip Morris Companies, Inc., 341 F.3d 1253, 1260 (11th Cir. 2003). The issue, as urged by the debtors, was whether a Chapter 15 court could order to liquidate U.S. property for the purpose of satisfying Canadian tax claims. Judge Caryl Delano noted that the application of the Foreign Revenue Rule in the Chapter 15 context was a matter of first impression. Traditionally, in non- chapter 15 contexts, courts would refuse to permit a U.S. proceeding (whether in bankruptcy or not) to adjudicate tax claims under foreign laws. Section 1513(b)(2)(A) states that the language in subsection (a) and paragraph (1) “do not change or codify present law as to the allowability of foreign revenue claims or other foreign public law claims in a proceeding under this title.” Section 1513(b)(2)(B) goes on to say “[a]llowance and priority as to a foreign tax claim or other foreign public law shall be governed by any applicable tax treaty of the United States, under the conditions and circumstances specified therein.” The bankruptcy court ruled that the Revenue Rule did not apply because it was not being asked to “adjudicate or rule upon the validity or priority of the Canadian taxing authorities’ claims.” That matter, the court noted, would have to be decided in the Canadian proceeding. Second, the court noted that as a general matter, Chapter 15 courts are not in the business of adjudicating the validity of foreign claims. Finally, the court held that the case did not touch on any fundamental U.S. public policies, as it was simply a dispute as between the debtors and the foreign representative. In fact, the court found that it was promoting the public policies underlying not only Chapter 15 but the U.S.-Canada tax treaty. As an aside, the court noted that, to the extent the Canadian case involved more than just tax claims, that would further support its conclusion that the Foreign Revenue Rule does not apply. Conclusion These three Florida case descriptions illustrate how Chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code has elements of both bankruptcy law and more traditional asset recovery tools. When considering whether Chapter 15’s toolbox could help in the asset recovery effort, it appears the sun is shining in Florida’s bankruptcy courts. Click here to read the full article. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open 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... Attorney Spotlight Jan 29, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Alain M. Acanda 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was inspired to pursue a career in the law after having negative experiences with the law as.

Sequor Law has become Miami's go-to firm for Brazilian Chapter 15 cases, handling cross-border insolvency, asset recovery, and fraud investigations for Brazilian companies and institutions. Miami’s Specialist in Brazilian Chapter 15 Cases Open Legal Insights Open January 6, 2020 3 minutes read Sequor Law By Kirk O’Neil When the foreign representative of defunct Brazilian limestone mining company Brasagro Fertilizantes Minerais Ltda. in October sought to investigate and recover alleged improper transfers of the company’s assets to the U.S., its advisers made a popular choice for the firm to handle the needed Chapter 15 petition: Miami-based Sequor Law PA. Sequor also in October handled a Chapter 15 petition for Brazilian media company Minuano Comunicações e Produções Editorias Ltda., which sought recognition of its involuntary insolvency case in Brazil as it worked to recover assets that might have been diverted to banks in Miami and New York. The fledgling law firm, which former shareholders of Astigarraga Davis Mullins & Grossman PA formed in April 2017 after that firm split in two, has quickly grown into the favored counsel of many Brazilian companies, financial institutions, sovereign entities and state-owned enterprises seeking representation for insolvency, financial services litigation, financial fraud and asset recovery. Sequor, which on its website says its name in Latin means “to pursue, to chase, to attain,” has been involved in 13 Brazilian insolvency cases since 2017, according to shareholder Leyza B. Florin . About 60% of Sequor’s total business focuses on Chapter 15 cases, and 80% of those filings are for Brazilian insolvency cases, said Blanco, who joined the firm in June 2018 from Orlando, Fla.-based GrayRobinson PA. In addition to Minuano and Brasagro, the firm has represented sugar and ethanol producer São Fernando Açúcar e Álcool Ltda. (Aug. 22), construction company Knijnik Participações SA (July 24), securities holder Schahin Holdings SA (July 26), process control equipment maker Smar Equipamentos Industrias Ltda. (Feb. 28) and rubber tire product maker Marangoni Tread Latino America Indústria e Comércio de Artefatos de Borracha Ltda. (Feb. 15) in Chapter 15 cases in 2019. The “Southern District of Miami is a popular court for Brazilian filings because of their many connections to Miami,” Blanco said. “It’s the gateway to the Americas and home to a great deal of Brazilian offshore business. It is a natural conclusion that in looking to track offshore transactions from Brazil that Miami would be a likely first place to look.” Sequor’s Chapter 15 roots also go deep, with founding shareholder Gregory S. Grossman filing the first Chapter 15 case in Florida, for a Barbadian financial institution while he was at Astigarraga Davis. The predecessor firm handled a fair amount of Brazilian Chapter 15 proceedings, and there have been more to go around lately. Blanco pointed to an apparent rise in fraud-related cases that require investigation as the root of an increase in Chapter 15 filings. In addition, she said more Brazilian insolvency advisers are familiar with Chapter 15 as a tool to assist that country’s bankruptcy courts in investigating and obtaining assets that may have been transferred outside the country to defraud creditors. The Operação Lava Jato, or Operation Car Wash, criminal investigation that began in 2014 ultimately embroiled state-controlled Petróleo Brasileiro SA and construction company Odebrecht SA and led to indictments and convictions of politicians and professionals as it probed alleged money laundering, corruption, embezzlement and bribery. Among the politicians indicted and jailed were former Brazilian presidents Fernando Collor de Mello, Michel Temer and Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. Odebrecht CEO Marcelo Odebrecht also was sentenced to prison. Bribes and improper conduct by defendants caused a domino effect with insolvencies and liquidations of companies, Blanco said. Companies or individuals moving company assets offshore and outside Brazil led to many Chapter 15 filings, Blanco asserted. Brazil’s recession and severe economic crisis, which began in 2014, also contributed to the financial distress that has led to more filings, she added. “Sequor was formed to offer clients the relentless global pursuit to recover assets lost to bad actors,” said Blanco, who has been working on bankruptcy, restructuring, insolvency and Chapter 15 cases since 1997. “That pursuit often occurs through the use of Chapter 15 cross-border insolvency cases and other asset recovery tools.” The law firm employs 15 full-time attorneys and one of counsel. All of the multilingual firm’s attorneys focus on asset recovery, and seven attorneys have substantial bankruptcy experience, Blanco said. 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 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... Attorney Spotlight Jan 29, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Alain M. Acanda 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was inspired to pursue a career in the law after having negative experiences with the law as.

Sequor Law handles complex appellate litigation in U.S. and cross-border disputes, coordinating closely with trial teams to preserve or reverse decisions below Appellate Law Sequor Law has a proven history of successfully handling high-stakes appeals in the United States, representing clients in complex disputes involving fraud, insolvency, and cross-border enforcement. The firm focuses on preserving favorable outcomes and reversing legal or factual errors through disciplined, strategic appellate advocacy. An Integrated Approach Built for Complex, Multi-Jurisdictional Disputes Sequor Law approaches appellate litigation as a critical phase of complex dispute resolution, representing clients in courts of second and third instance across the United States. The firm represents clients in appellate matters involving complex legal and factual issues, in both offensive and defensive postures. Its work is directed at preserving favorable rulings, reversing adverse decisions, and addressing errors of law or fact arising from proceedings below. Appellate strategy is developed in coordination with trial and evidentiary hearing teams, ensuring continuity in issue development, record preservation, and legal positioning throughout the life cycle of a dispute. This integrated approach is particularly important in matters involving extensive records, cross-border elements, and evolving legal frameworks. The firm identifies and develops dispositive issues for appellate review, prepares comprehensive briefing, and presents arguments aligned with the standards and expectations of appellate courts. Sequor Law has appeared in matters before the United States Supreme Court, multiple United States Courts of Appeals, and United States District Courts sitting in their appellate capacity, as well as state intermediate and supreme courts. The firm also acts as instructing counsel in cross-border appellate and post-judgment proceedings, including matters in jurisdictions across the European Union and the Americas. The firm represents sovereign governments, high-net-worth individuals, victims of fraud, institutional insolvency practitioners, court-appointed fiduciaries, businesses, and financial institutions. Its appellate work frequently arises from disputes involving fraud, corruption, asset recovery, and cross-border insolvency, where the legal issues are technical, the factual records are extensive, and the outcomes carry significant financial and strategic consequences. A Global Appellate Footprint — From U.S. Courts to Cross-Border Proceedings Open Christopher A. Noel Partner cnoel@sequorlaw.com (+1) 305-372-8282, Ext. 264 Open Leyza B. Florin Shareholder lflorin@sequorlaw.com (+1) 305-372-8282, Ext. 300 Open David Short Counsel dshort@sequorlaw.com (+1) 202-900-8740 Open Open Key contacts Key Contacts

A federal judge confirms a $24.5M arbitration award under the New York Convention, clearing enforcement against sovereign bank assets. NY Judge Confirms Investment Co’s $24.5M Arbitration Award Open In the News Open August 26, 2020 2 minutes read Sequor Law A federal judge in the Southern District of New York confirmed a $24.5 million arbitration award in favor of Hong Kong based Super Perfect Investments Ltd. against Tajikistan’s Agroinvestbank Open Joint Stock Co. The decision came after the bank failed to respond to the enforcement petition by the August 17, 2020 deadline. Judge Jesse M. Furman found no genuine issue of material fact and granted summary judgment enforcing the award. The dispute stems from failed cotton supply contracts. In 2012, Agroinvestbank issued guarantees to Super Perfect tied to agreements for the purchase of 20,000 metric tons of cotton from Tajik company Levakan-M LLC. In February 2013, the bank issued an $11 million guarantee, which was later revised and split. When Levakan failed to deliver the cotton, Super Perfect sought payment under the $11 million guarantee. The bank refused, asserting that the original guarantee had been canceled and that a subsequent $6 million guarantee was never issued. In July 2017, a Swiss Chambers’ Arbitration Institution panel in Geneva ruled in favor of Super Perfect. The arbitrator determined that the revised $11 million guarantee remained valid and applied an 18% interest rate. The final award totaled $11 million in damages, $12.86 million in interest, and $739,668 in legal costs. Super Perfect petitioned the New York federal court to recognize the award under the New York Convention and Section 9 of the Federal Arbitration Act. The company argued that both the United States and Tajikistan are signatories to the Convention, giving the court subject matter jurisdiction. It also identified Agroinvestbank assets in the district, including a Citibank account, to establish quasi in rem jurisdiction and pursue enforcement. With no opposition filed, the court confirmed the award, clearing the way for enforcement against the bank’s U.S. assets. To read the full 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 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... Attorney Spotlight Jan 29, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Alain M. Acanda 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was inspired to pursue a career in the law after having negative experiences with the law as.

Sequor Law was established in Miami by internationally noted attorneys Edward H. Davis, Jr. and Gregory Grossman to focus on international asset recovery, financial fraud, cross-border insolvency, and financial services litigation. Internationally Noted Attorneys Establish Sequor Law Open Firm News Open April 11, 2017 2 minutes read Sequor Law New Firm to Focus on International Asset Recovery, Financial Fraud, Cross-Border Insolvency and Financial Services Litigation MIAMI – April 11, 2017 –Edward H. Davis,Jr., a founding shareholder of Astigarraga Davis, today announced the opening of Sequor Law to focus on representing clients internationally in asset recovery, financial fraud, cross-border insolvency and financial services litigation. Sequor Law’s attorneys include all members of the Astigarraga Davis top-ranked asset recovery team. Jose Astigarraga and the other attorneys in the firm’s international arbitration practice have moved their practice to join a global law firm. Davis and Gregory Grossman , another founding shareholder, consider this a natural next step in the development of their respective law practices. “We are energized about the evolution of our practices. The new platform of Sequor Law will better position us to meet a growing global demand for our high-quality legal counsel,” said Davis, a certified fraud examiner who has been recognized as the Asset Recovery Lawyer of the Year for the past four years by Who’s Who Legal and who has an internationally recognized financial fraud, asset recovery and international litigation practice. “It will enable the attorneys at Sequor Law to continue building upon our unique strengths and pursue significant new opportunities in areas we excel, while also becoming more nimble in today’s ever-changing legal environment.” Added Davis: “Sequor Law derives its name from the Latin word ‘to pursue, to chase, to attain,’ and signifies our core values: the agile, aggressive, and relentless pursuit of assets and success on behalf of our clients.” Sequor Law’s international insolvency and financial services litigation practice is headed by Grossman. He will focus his practice on creditors’ rights, bankruptcy, insolvency litigation, and operational bank litigation. Grossman filed the first Chapter 15 Petition in the state of Florida and is recognized as a thought leader in the use of cross-border insolvency proceedings on behalf of creditors and fraud victims. Sequor Law’s multi-lingual team includes: Arnoldo Lacayo , a shareholder, certified specialist in asset recovery, and incoming chair of The Florida Bar International Law Section who focuses his practice on international corruption investigations and asset recovery for governments and state-owned enterprises Daniel Coyle , an associate who represents creditors and insolvency practitioners in domestic and international insolvency matters Nyana Abreu Miller , an associate who focuses her practice on asset recovery for women in cross-border divorce cases Cristina Vicens Beard , an associate focusing her practice on representing victims in the recovery of assets in cross border frauds At Sequor Law, the attorneys will continue their collaboration with ICC FraudNet, a world-class network of specialized attorneys, best-in-class investigators, and forensic accountants. About Sequor Law Sequor Law is a Miami-based 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. More information is available at www.SequorLaw.com ### Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open 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... Attorney Spotlight Jan 29, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Alain M. Acanda 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was inspired to pursue a career in the law after having negative experiences with the law as.

Get to know Sequor Law Attorney Alejandro Rodriguez Vanzetti, a Miami-raised international law specialist who shares his passion for cross-border asset recovery and Latin American legal matters. Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Alejandro Rodriguez Vanzetti Open Attorney Spotlight Open July 22, 2025 2 minutes read Sequor Law 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? In college, I found myself drawn to international politics and law, especially as they relate to Latin America. Growing up in Miami, I was always exposed to these conversations, but studying them at an academic level gave me a deeper appreciation for the region’s complexities. Over time, I realized I wanted a career where I could combine these interests with my passion for writing, one where I could make a meaningful impact. Cliché aside, law felt like the natural path: a way to advocate for others while shaping real outcomes in people’s lives. 2. Why did you choose the areas of law that you practice? In a previous role before law school, I was introduced to evidence gathering and asset recovery and was immediately drawn to the work. What captivated me most was the cross-border nature of these cases—collaborating across jurisdictions (often with foreign-trained lawyers) and learning the legal frameworks of other countries. The shared goal of securing critical evidence for foreign proceedings and recovering assets for victims of fraud made the work feel both challenging and meaningful. 3. What skills do you draw upon when it comes to your specific practice areas? I often draw on the persistence I developed early in my career, those moments when I had to go above and beyond. Whether it was crafting a seemingly impossible argument or navigating an unfamiliar area of law, I learned to dig deep and push through challenges. That mindset—doing whatever it takes to reach the right outcome—continues to guide my approach today. 4. What is the most rewarding part about your job? Two parts: Contributing to developing areas of the law that have a global impact and finding creative solutions to complex problems. That combination is what makes this work so fulfilling. 5. Tell us about a mentor who made an impact on your career. I’ve been fortunate enough to have had many mentors. What they all had in common was their belief in my potential, often seeing something in me that I hadn’t yet recognized in myself. Most recently, Magistrate Judge Lisette M. Reid, my former boss, did just that: trusting my abilities while consistently challenging me to grow and learn. 6. If you weren’t practicing law, what would you be doing? I’d likely be working in journalism. 7. What might people be surprised to learn about you? I can recite the opening lines of the Declaration of Independence. For some reason it has stuck with me ever since 7th grade civics class! 8. What is a good book or article you read recently? An article by Yves Klein published by Chambers and Partners on tracing the evolution of asset recovery over the years titled “International Asset Tracing and Recovery at 25: Where Do We Stand?” Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open 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... Attorney Spotlight Jan 29, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Alain M. Acanda 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was inspired to pursue a career in the law after having negative experiences with the law as.

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 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... Attorney Spotlight Jan 29, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Alain M. Acanda 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was inspired to pursue a career in the law after having negative experiences with the law as.

How the unlimited homestead exemption in Florida and Texas lets wealthy debtors protect mansions from creditors, creating a $70B legal loophole in South Florida real estate. The $70B loophole, or: How to turn your mansion into an offshore account Open In the News Open October 23, 2018 9 minutes read Sequor Law Wealthy in a financial bind increasingly turn to the homestead exemption By Konrad Putzier In the fall of 2016, Roger Ailes was by all accounts a very wealthy man. Fox News had just pushed him out from the company he built over allegations of sexual harassment, but paid him $40 million for his troubles. So he did what many other rich retirees before him have done: he bought a house in Florida. Through a trust, Ailes paid $36 million in cash for a six-bedroom, 12,747- square-foot mansion in Palm Beach. In November that year, the longtime Putnam County, NY resident filed a declaration of domicile in Florida, public records show, making the new property at 6 Ocean Lane his primary home. The declaration had its perks. Ailes was a defendant in a potentially expensive sexual-harassment lawsuit by former Fox News host Andrea Tantaros and was about to become a defendant in another, by former contributor Julie Roginsky. A judgment against him could put his assets on the line. But making the Palm Beach mansion his primary residence could insulate the house and up to half an acre of land around it from any legal claims, thanks to a handy Florida law known as the “homestead exemption.” Ailes died in May 2017 at age 77. Fox News, also a defendant in the suits, settled Roginsky’s lawsuit in December of that year and Tantaros’ lawsuit was dismissed in May 2018. Ailes’ widow, Elizabeth Ailes, declared the Palm Beach property her homestead for tax purposes in 2017 and 2018, property records show. A spokesperson for Elizabeth did not respond to requests for comment. Curious if someone of means is in a financial pickle? Check if they recently bought a mansion in Florida or Texas. Paying millions for a palatial home in the Sunshine State is usually an indicator of unfettered wealth. But it could also be a warning sign that the buyer may be trying to protect money from creditors or legal claims. Florida and Texas are among the few states with a so-called unlimited homestead exemption, a law enshrined in the state constitution stipulating that your home is off limits to creditors, no matter how much it is worth or how much you owe. For people staring down big debts or potentially costly lawsuits, this creates a powerful incentive to buy the priciest property they can find in a homestead state. Rising home prices mean more wealth is now beyond the reach of creditors. In three South Florida counties — Miami-Dade, Broward and Palm Beach — alone, the combined appraised value of all luxury homes appraised at $1 million or more whose owners claim the homestead exemption in tax filings is $69.9 billion (see chart), according to The Real Deal’s analysis of the Florida Department of Revenue’s 2018 tax roll. The true market values of these properties could be much higher.* “If you go to a lawyer and ask ‘how do I protect my assets?,’ the first thing they say is: ‘Buy a valuable homestead,’” said Jeffrey Davis, a law professor at the University of Florida. “Some people just sort of call it estate planning.” Funny laws Residents of most U.S. states get a homestead exemption protecting some of their home equity from creditors. In California, for example, most people have a cap of $75,000, while in Virginia, the cap is $5,000. Florida, Texas, Kansas, Iowa, Oklahoma and South Dakota, however, have no limit. In these states, buying an expensive property and claiming the homestead exemption has some of the perks of stashing your money in an offshore account — protection from creditors and lawsuits — without having to transfer money overseas. “If you’re faced with losing what you have, the psychological toll it takes on you is the same whether you’re really rich or an average Joe,” said Wayne Patton, a Miami-based asset-protection attorney. “So the idea of moving somewhere where you can protect the bulk of what you have is very appealing.” The list of the rich and famous who have taken advantage of the exemption is long, and it includes NFL legend O.J. Simpson, movie star Burt Reynolds and one of the original Miami Worldcenter developers, Marc Roberts. Simpson had spent much of his life in California, but bought a home in Miami for $575,000 in 2000 and moved there after he lost a $33.5 million civil suit brought by the relatives of his murdered ex-wife. “They got funny laws in this state,” Simpson told the New Yorker in 2001, explaining why he likes living in Florida. The unlimited exemption has been around for more than a century, but its popularity is on the rise. Several offshore financial centers have increased transparency and made life harder for those looking to hide money abroad. Meanwhile, Florida’s rising property market over the past decade has made buying homes there more attractive. In both Florida and Texas, debtors need to actually move into the property and show that they want to make it their permanent residence – by changing their voter registration, for example – to get the exemption. But they do not need to have lived in it for long. There are exceptions: those who buy a home with proceeds from criminal activity aren’t protected, and homeowners who fail to pay taxes or don’t make mortgage payments on their homestead can still see it seized. Evading creditors isn’t the main reason people claim the homestead exemption, asset-recovery lawyers say. Making a property your homestead carries significant tax benefits. But even if people buy a property purely and explicitly to bilk their lenders, that’s totally legal – at least in Florida. In 2001 , the state’s Supreme Court ruled that the exemption protects a property owner even if she bought the home with “the specific intent of hindering, delaying, or defrauding creditors.” The ruling has turned into a nightmare for lenders and asset-recovery lawyers nationwide. Because many debtors across the U.S. can, in theory, move to Florida at a moment’s notice and buy a house, they know that a part of their fortune equivalent to the value of a hypothetical Florida mansion can’t ever be seized by creditors. Of all of Florida’s eccentric laws, the homestead exemption is the one it sort of managed to force on the rest of the country as well. “We’ll have a lawsuit against somebody where they will say ‘you can sue me, and might even win, but by the time you win I’m going to sell my house up here and all my other assets and I’m going to buy a house in Florida’,” said Schuyler Carroll, a New York-based asset-recovery attorney at Perkins Coie, adding that he’s been involved in dozens of cases where the exemption came up. “So we settle.” Paupers with palaces Tom Hicks made a fortune as a private-equity investor and a name for himself as the owner of the Texas Rangers baseball team and English soccer club Liverpool F.C. But the Dallas resident found himself in deep trouble after the financial crisis. In 2010, the Rangers filed for bankruptcy, and Hicks sold the team to pay off his creditors. In 2011 , a group of former Rangers investors sued Hicks , claiming he had used the team to improperly enrich himself. JPMorgan Chase reportedly sought $35.4 million from him. As Hicks fought for what was left of his wealth – he had also been forced to sell Liverpool F.C. – he could be fairly certain of one thing: no one could take away his palatial Dallas estate. Hicks had bought the nearly 30,000-square-foot home at 10000 Holloway Drive in 1999 — the year his Dallas Stars hockey team won the Stanley Cup. Built by architect Maurice Fatio for Italian aristocrat Pio Crespi in the 1930s, the 25-acre property includes a library decked in walnut wood, crystal chandeliers, two guest houses, a pool and a lake. In 2013, Dallas County appraisers valued the property at $40 million. Property records show that Hicks claimed the homestead exemption on the property. “He was pleading poverty, but everyone knew he had this absolutely phenomenal house,” recalled a source familiar with the Rangers bankruptcy. An attorney for Hicks declined to comment for this article. Hicks can thank an earlier banking crisis for the law that shielded his mansion. In 1837, a year after Texas declared its independence from Mexico, a financial panic hit the U.S., leading to a wave of loan defaults and bank failures. The crisis would have a lasting impact on the state’s laws, according to Michael Ariens, a legal historian at St. Mary’s University. “When Texas became a state in 1845, the idea that creditors could take the essentials of a farmer’s or workman’s way to earn a living was anathema,” Ariens said. “And there are always more debtors than creditors as voters.” The homestead exemption eventually became a “sacrosanct” part of the constitution, according to Joe Wielebinski, a Texas-based asset-recovery attorney at Winstead PC. “Texas is a state with a history of people from other areas coming to this free, open and large state for a lot of reasons,” he said. “Whether it’s embarrassing or not, one of the reasons they came here was to avoid creditors in other states.” In Texas, the debtor protection covers up to 10 acres in cities and up to 100 acres for an individual (200 for a family) in the countryside from creditors. In Florida, which included the exemption in its constitution in 1868, it covers just half an acre in a municipality and 160 acres outside a municipality. But as property prices in Miami and Palm Beach rose in the 1990s and early 2000s, debtors realized that they could squeeze a lot of money into half an acre. So sue me In late 1989, former Major League Baseball commissioner Bowie Kuhn’s Manhattan law firm went bankrupt. Weeks later, Kuhn bought a $1 million, five-bedroom home in Ponte Vedra Beach and claimed the homestead exemption. “There is nothing inappropriate about my actions,” he told the New York Times in 1993: “People do this all the time.” In 1996, Burt Reynolds filed for bankruptcy but kept his $2.5 million property near Palm Beach. Paul Bilzerian, a former corporate raider who went bankrupt in Florida for the second time in 2001 with $140 million in debt, got to keep his $5 million, 11-bedroom home in Tampa Bay, which included an indoor basketball court and a cinema. Martin Kenney, a British Virgin Islands-based asset-recovery lawyer, recalls representing a hedge fund in the early 2000s. The fund had lent $20 million to a Florida doctor, who defaulted on the loan and pleaded poverty even though he owned a $7 million home near Sarasota, according to Kenney. “We didn’t litigate over the house because we thought, ‘why do that if you’re just going to waste your time and lose?’” he said. “Like all policy choices, you end up with people that are unethical, abusing the privilege, doing things that probably the folks who created that homestead law never envisioned would happen.” As abuse spread, the banking industry lobbied to change bankruptcy laws, facing fierce resistance from the real-estate industry and property owners in homestead states. In 1998, George W. Bush, then governor of Texas, wrote a letter to the House Judiciary Committee arguing that a “homestead cap is a clear violation of states’ rights with regard to state private property.” Current Attorney General Jeff Sessions, then a senator representing Alabama, found himself on the other side, telling the Times in 2001 that the unlimited exemption “isn’t just.” The bankers prevailed and in 2005, Congress passed the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act. It stipulated, among other changes, that those who file for bankruptcy can no longer claim the unlimited exemption unless they have lived in the property for at least 40 months. “If a bankruptcy filing occurs today, it’s not clear that a homestead is bulletproof from all creditors’ claims,” said Wielebinski, the asset-recovery attorney. “Thirty years ago, if you put money into your homestead you were virtually immune from the claims of all creditors except for the mortgage lender and taxes. So it’s a dramatic change.” The housing crisis further eroded the appeal of the exemption. Property prices plummeted, and there’s no point in claiming the exemption on a home that’s underwater anyway. “Since 2008 we saw less people claiming it because there was no equity in the house,” said Michael Bakst, a Palm Beach-based attorney at Greenspoon Marder who specializes in bankruptcy and insolvency cases. But as the Florida real estate market recovered from the crisis and the state attracted more of the world’s wealthy, so did the homestead exemption. Marc Roberts, a former boxing promoter and one of the original developers behind the Miami Worldcenter project, claimed the homestead exemption on his $1.5 million home in Jupiter, Florida, when he filed for bankruptcy in March 2010, court records show. Roberts could not be reached for comment. Keurig Green Mountain founder Robert Stiller reportedly paid $55 million for a mansion in Palm Beach through an LLC in January 2014 while he was still a defendant in three shareholder lawsuits against Green Mountain. He already owned a home in the same town but soon declared the new property his homestead, public records show. Although there is no indication Stiller bought the property because of the exemption, his role as a defendant meant he could potentially benefit from the law. An attorney representing Stiller did not comment. The exemption continues to be highly effective. Gregory Grossman , a Miami-based asset-recovery attorney at Sequor Law, said he was unable to contest the exemption on behalf of creditors in more than 95 percent of the cases he was involved in. And even the fact that your money is tied up in your home isn’t too much of a problem for those with patience. Take Tom Hicks. While the lawsuits against him dragged on, he continued to claim the Dallas estate as his primary residence. Then, in late 2012, Hicks settled a legal dispute with the Rangers, and on January 11, 2013, a lawsuit brought by his lenders was dismissed. Two weeks later, news broke that Hicks had put the home on the market for $135 million — at the time reportedly the most expensive residential listing in the country. He later cut the asking price to $100 million and sold it in January 2016 for a reported $58 million. 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 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... Attorney Spotlight Jan 29, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Alain M. Acanda 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was inspired to pursue a career in the law after having negative experiences with the law as.

Sequor Law welcomes Jennifer Mosquera as Associate Attorney. A bilingual attorney and former judicial law clerk, she strengthens the firm's growing Miami-based legal team. Sequor Law adds Attorney Jennifer Mosquera to Team Open Firm News Open February 14, 2022 2 minutes read Sequor Law Miami, Florida- Sequor Law is pleased to announce the addition of Ms. Jennifer Mosquera to the firm as an Associate Attorney effective February 14, 2022. Jennifer joins an already impressive roster of talented, hard-working award-winning attorneys. The addition of Jennifer confirms the firm’s ongoing dedication to growth and its commitment to the development of new attorneys. “We are eager to have Jennifer, a talented bi-lingual attorney who will strengthen our firm by adding to the high caliber of skill and integrity we have at Sequor Law. She brings with her the expertise, knowledge and commitment that our clients expect,” said founding shareholder Gregory S. Grossman. “Jennifer is the second attorney added to our roster in the last six months. Our ongoing growth is directly tied to our strategic plan.” Prior to joining Sequor Law, Jennifer served as a law clerk to the Hon. Judge Mark W. Klingensmith at the Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal. She worked on a variety of complex issues within foreclosures, breach of contract claims, and fraud-based disputes among other civil cases. Jennifer received her J.D. graduating magna cum laude in 2019 from Florida State University College of Law. An award-winning student, Jennifer was on the Dean’s List, was a merit scholarship recipient and was on the board of both the Florida State Law Review and the Florida State University College of Law Moot Court Team. During her time in law school, Jennifer interned for multiple judges, clerked for the Consumer Protection Division of the Office of the Florida Attorney General, and held a summer associate position with an Am Law 200 firm. She obtained her B.A. in Political Science and her B.A. in Philosophy from Florida International University in 2016. Jennifer Mosquera’s practice is focused on asset recovery, bankruptcy and insolvency, financial fraud, international commercial litigation and judgement, and arbitral award collection as well as corruption and proceeds of crime recovery. She is fluent in English and Spanish and is admitted to practice in Florida. “The addition of Jennifer adds strength and depth to our capabilities, and I look forward to working with her to continue to deliver comprehensive, top-tier service to our clients.” said Shareholder Leyza B. Florin. ****** Sequor Law is a Miami-based 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. More information is available at www.SequorLaw.com . Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open 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... Attorney Spotlight Jan 29, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Alain M. Acanda 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was inspired to pursue a career in the law after having negative experiences with the law as.

Get to know Sequor Law's David Short, an anti-corruption and anti-fraud attorney who shares his path into international law, his commitment to making the world better, and his practice approach. Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know David Short Open Attorney Spotlight Open October 9, 2025 2 minutes read Sequor Law 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I don’t think that it was a matter of inspiration, but of choice – I wanted a career that would allow me to make the world a better place, and law was one of the ways that I thought I might do so. 2. Why did you choose the areas of law that you practice? Like many lawyers, it wasn’t entirely purposeful. I started as a generalist and focused on opportunities that were both challenging and rewarding. This naturally led to anti-corruption and anti-fraud work, in part because of the firms I came to and the people I worked with. 3. What skills do you draw upon when it comes to your specific practice areas? Writing, more than anything. Being able to clearly communicate ideas and principles in an organized, digestible way that is tailored to the recipient or recipients – whether a client, opposing counsel, colleague, or a particular judge – is invaluable. But a key part of that is rewriting – being able to adapt and refine someone else’s writing while trying to preserve their voice as much as possible. 4. What is the most rewarding part about your job? There is a quietly and deeply satisfying feeling at the realization that something I thought about and wrote has become part of the common law in some way. This happens in winning, of course, at least if the judge both rules in your favor and does it for the reasons that you proposed. But it can happen even on a loss – you can at least guide the court away from adopting a particularly bad interpretation of a law, even if the outcome is not what you hoped for. 5. Tell us about a mentor who made an impact on your career. Janice Platt, a senior staff attorney at the sixth circuit, was relentless in helping me improve my writing skills. Endless, continuous, and tailored feedback to make me as effective in different styles as possible. That was the foundation I needed to find my own voice as a lawyer, and it made me much better at understanding why courts use certain words or phrases. 6. If you weren’t practicing law, what would you be doing? Likely scientific research. It was graduate school or law school, but law school presented better career opportunities for me. 7. What might people be surprised to learn about you? I used to create mods for video games. Only one set of mods really took off, and that was for a relatively niche game, but I poured a couple thousand hours into that hobby over several years between learning the relevant modding commands, researching the underlying ideas I wanted to implement, working on pixel art, and then implementing and testing my ideas until they were ready for release. 8. What is a good book or article you read recently? I’m currently working my way through The Wind’s Twelve Quarters, by Ursula LeGuin. She’s a wonderful writer. A common theme through the short stories is how culture informs perception – even when a narrator isn’t unreliable, they still might misapprehend something because a difference that someone else might find important doesn’t matter (or doesn’t even exist) from the primary narrator’s point of view. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open 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... Attorney Spotlight Jan 29, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Alain M. Acanda 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was inspired to pursue a career in the law after having negative experiences with the law as.

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 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... Attorney Spotlight Jan 29, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Alain M. Acanda 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was inspired to pursue a career in the law after having negative experiences with the law as.

Sequor Law monitors COVID-19's impact across Latin America, analyzing emerging threats to cross-border insolvencies as the pandemic disrupts economies, court systems, and exit financing. COVID-19 and Cross-Border Insolvencies Open Legal Insights Open April 17, 2020 5 minutes read Sequor Law Brazil’s health minister has predicted that the spread of COVID-19 would reach its peak between April and June and has warned that Brazil’s health system could reach saturation by the end of April. As the novel coronavirus has been spreading throughout the region, Sequor Law has monitored its impact across Latin America. Brazil confirmed its first COVID-19 case, the first in Latin America, from a traveler who had visited Northern Italy before arriving in Sao Paulo, a city of approximately 20 million people with the largest urban population in the Americas. It is also the country’s financial center and a business hub representing one of Latin America’s largest economies. The news, which arrived after a long weekend of Carnival celebrations, brought with it a deep and almost immediate dive in the Ibovespa stock index similar to the losses that have been seen elsewhere around the globe. Most recently, Brazil closed its border to eight neighboring countries, banned travel from Europe and Asia, and closed schools, colleges, courts, and commercial business in its largest cities. Brazil’s top soccer teams have handed stadiums over to health authorities to turn them into field hospitals and clinics in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic. Brazil’s health minister has predicted that the spread of COVID-19 would reach its peak between April and June and has warned that Brazil’s health system could reach saturation by the end of April. At present, the country has over 4,600 confirmed cases, 165 deaths and reports indicate that the number of new cases is steadily growing. With various government officials testing positive for COVID-19, including 14 who accompanied its president, Jair Bolsonaro, to Florida a few weeks ago, the federal government has declared a national emergency in Brazil allowing the government to free up budget resources and announcing an economic stimulus package of approximately $40 billion euros. Notwithstanding all of these measures, Brazil’s currency recently hit an all-time low of R $5.2 per dollar before its Central Bank helped pare losses by cutting its benchmark interest rate to an all-time low of 3.75%, pledging to deploy financial stability policies to fight the crisis. Like the United States, closures of commercial establishments and travel bans have hit Brazil’s retail, entertainment and aviation sectors hard. Like Brazil, nations throughout the region are in a race to “flatten” the exponential spread of COVID-19. Recent reports have stated that every country in Latin America and the Caribbean now have confirmed cases of COVID-19. Argentina is on total lockdown. In Chile—a country that already faced a political crisis prior to the coronavirus pandemic—restricted freedom of movement has postponed its April referendum for a new Constitution. Examples of such “social distancing”-inspired policies are ubiquitous. Efforts to get ahead of the most horrific potential consequences of COVID-19, however, have begun to exact a hefty price, as large sectors of the regional economy have all but shut down. Even in these early days, we have already begun to see an impact in U.S. bankruptcies, as distressed companies in pending reorganization proceedings are losing their exit financing and private equity investors are lowering or pulling bids to acquire the assets of bankrupt companies due to market volatility caused by the pandemic. Unfortunately, with no clear medical solution on the horizon and talk of increasing infection rates impacting the region, it appears likely that the situation will get worse before it gets better. On March 27, the managing director of the International Monetary Fund, Kristalina Georgieva, said that the global economy has now entered a recession that could be as bad as or worse than the financial crisis in 2009. Although Georgieva noted that the world economy could experience a “sizeable rebound” in 2021 if nations are successful in containing the pandemic, she stressed that “a key concern about a long-lasting impact of the sudden stop of the world economy is the risk of a wave of bankruptcies and layoffs that not only can undermine the recovery but erode the fabric of our societies.” These statements capture the reality that, unlike other recent recessions, it is difficult to identify sectors of the economy that will not be impacted by the current crisis. The extent of the crisis is perhaps most poignantly captured by the report that more than 6.6 million workers filed claims for unemployment in the United States this week—a number that shattered all prior records for such filings. Although the most widely publicized effects of the worldwide shutdown have been seen in the aviation, cruise, hospitality (restaurant and hotel) and retail sectors, this crisis will undoubtedly result in a sharp increase in both domestic bankruptcy cases, and cross-border insolvency matters across all sectors where foreign companies and liquidators may seek U.S. assistance to obtain relief from creditors (such as by obtaining a stay of collection actions), to protect assets located in the United States or to obtain information or directly enforce rights against third parties in furtherance of a foreign bankruptcy proceeding. Certainly, our years of experience as bankruptcy specialists tell us that the rise of domestic bankruptcy cases for small businesses and the sectors of the economy hardest hit by the shutdowns are inescapable, as many businesses cannot withstand the strain of even a temporary closure without revenue combined with continuing obligations to pay fixed costs. It is likely that a similar dynamic will play out in national economies around the globe, including Brazil and other Latin American countries. Countries are already responding to the anticipated surge in insolvencies. In the United States, the recently enacted stimulus bill dramatically expands access to the simplified and expedited procedures that apply to small business bankruptcies, such that relief may temporarily be accessed to reorganize debts up to $7,5 million (up from $2,725,625) through Dec. 31, 2020, and extending payment plans under Chapter 13 up to seven years due to financial consequences stemming from COVID-19. Similarly, in Brazil, the Chamber of Deputies approved new preventive restructuring measures to enable companies facing financial difficulties to continue their operations including a special recovery plan for micro and small companies, allowing the extension of payment terms, reduction of interest and fines relating to tax debts, allowing more flexibility in relation to the possibility of negotiation of the parties in structuring a recovery plan and simplification of judicial procedures. In addition to the potential for increased bankruptcy filings, our experience in cross-border fraud suggests that widespread financial distress (such as that seen during the last financial crisis) and the ensuing insolvency proceedings that follow, bring increased oversight, investigations, and, potentially, the discovery of financial frauds (like Madoff or, more recently, the “Operação Lava Jato” or “Car Wash” scandal in Brazil) that may have previously been overlooked. The discovery of improper transfers and fraud, which are more likely to come to light during a downturn, and certainly in bankruptcy, may result in the filing of cross-border insolvency proceedings under Chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code, where administrators and trustees search for offshore assets and information that will facilitate recovery for their creditors. Even if the United States is fortunate enough to avoid the worst potential outcomes of this pandemic (most critically as it relates to the loss of human life), it appears inescapable that the ongoing shutdown of the global economy will result in increasing insolvency proceedings in all economic sectors (both in the United States and abroad). As numerous international businesses have substantial ties and interests in the United States (particularly, in South Florida), this drastic increase in foreign insolvency proceedings will inevitably translate to increasing numbers of cross-border insolvency proceedings in the United States. Leyza B. Florin and Fernando J. Menendez are shareholders at Sequor Law in Miami. The firm specializes in hidden asset recovery, notably Brazil-linked Chapter 15 cross-border cases. 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 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... Attorney Spotlight Jan 29, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Alain M. Acanda 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was inspired to pursue a career in the law after having negative experiences with the law as.