Sequor Law's Leyza B. Florin joins the Felony Miami podcast for the Bankruptcy Episode, exploring disparities in the criminal justice system and how the arts can drive meaningful reform. The Bankruptcy Episode w/ Paul Orshan, Leyza Florin Blanco, Jacqueline Calderín, and Joe Stone Open Events & Speaking Open August 19, 2018 1 minute read Sequor Law Felony Miami explores the disparities in the criminal justice system and the intersection of those disparities and the arts. In this exploration, Felony Miami seeks to educate, entertain, enlighten and contribute towards the improvement and fairness of the system. Felony Miami intends to do this by bringing together thought leaders, decision makers, the accused, the guilty, the not guilty and other participants in the system and in the arts to examine the current state of being, ways in which the system can be improved and ways in which the arts can contribute to this exploration and improvement. Sequor Law’s Leyza B. Florin spoke with Felony Miami as part of their Bankruptcy Episode. 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.

Grant Thornton liquidators of three BVI companies linked to an alleged $200M fraud by a former São Paulo mayor file for Chapter 15 recognition in Miami after pooling their proceedings. Pooled BVI liquidations seek US recognition Open In the News Open December 12, 2019 3 minutes read Sequor Law The liquidators of three British Virgin Islands companies tied up in an alleged US$200 million fraud conducted by a former mayor of São Paulo have filed for US recognition, days after a local court authorised the pooling of their liquidations. Grant Thornton director Matthew Richardson , who is joint liquidator alongside partner Kevin Hellard of BVI companies Durant International, Kildare Finance, and MacDoel Investment, filed for recognition of the three companies’ liquidations before the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida on 11 December. Kildare and Durant have been in liquidation in the BVI since November 2017, and MacDoel since April of this year. The BVI High Court ordered the liquidations to be pooled on 5 December after finding the movement of monies between the three of them “would have no practical advantage”, in the first written ruling of its kind in the jurisdiction. Richardson told the Florida court that the three companies had “no legitimate purpose” and were nothing more than vehicles to launder the proceeds of “wide-scale frauds” allegedly committed against the city of São Paulo by their controller, the city’s former mayor Paulo Maluf and members of his family. Maluf, a right-wing populist and member of Brazil’s Progessives party, served as mayor from 1969 to 1971 and 1993 to 1997. He is now under house arrest after being convicted of fraud in 2017 and sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment. It is alleged that during his latter term around US$200 million was misappropriated from public funds through “bribes, secret commissions and other fraudulent payments” in connection with the construction of the city’s Avenida Agua Espraiada, which divides the districts of Itaim Bibi and Campo Belo. The boulevard is now known as Avenida Jornalista Roberto Marinho following a 2003 renaming. Richardson says Brazilian authorities became aware of the fraud in 1999 when they received inquiries from police in Jersey after the submission of a suspicious transaction report to the island territory’s money laundering authorities. The governments of Brazil and São Paulo sought to prove the fraud in the Jersey courts by reference to a month’s sample of transactions flowing through Kildare and Durant. Based on those samples the Royal Court of Jersey found a constructive trust for US$10.5 million against the companies in 2012, and then the following year gave judgment against them for US$28.3 million in favour of the governments. Although the governments recovered US$3.44 million from Kildare and Durant’s Jersey accounts, the companies made no attempt to pay the balance, leading the governments to seek the appointment of liquidators in the BVI. Richardson said MacDoel had also played a role in the fraud as a conduit for funds, identifying just over US$4 million in Kildare’s books that it had paid to the company without consideration or evidence of repayment. The pair obtained MacDoel’s liquidation after it failed to pay a statutory demand for that amount in April. But Richardson said the money from the Jersey judgment “represents only a very small part of the total funds derived from the fraud”, because the judgment reflected only one month’s worth of transactions. He said the total amount of money derived from the frauds was “in the region of US$200 million” and claims against the three estates amount to at least US$172 million. He said he was as yet unable to determine the total value or location of the companies’ assets, but said he had learned they “may be concealed in the United States” and foreign tax havens, under the names of Maluf’s relatives. Richardson said he hopes to make recoveries by asserting proprietary claims in the US and possibly by bringing tracing claims against third parties. In the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida (19-26542) (19-26545) (19-26547) Counsel to Grant Thornton Sequor Law Partner Gregory Grossman in Miami In the High Court of Justice of the British Virgin Islands, Commercial Division Justice Adrian Jack Joint liquidators of Durant, Kildare and MacDoel Grant Thornton Partner Kevin Hellard in London and director Matthew Richardson in the British Virgin Islands Counsel to the joint liquidators Maples and Calder Partner Alex Hall Taylor , of counsel David Welford and associate Scott Tolliss in the British Virgin Islands 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's Leyza B. Florin represents the joint trustees of jailed Taiwanese-British businessman Ji-Chuen Jason Tsai in a Chapter 15 petition in Miami to track and recover US real estate assets. Miami Chapter 15 for jailed Taiwanese-British IT executive Open In the News Open November 14, 2019 4 minutes read Sequor Law The joint trustees of Ji-Chuen Jason Tsai, a “thoroughly dishonest” bankrupt Taiwanese-British businessman, have applied for Chapter 15 recognition to track his real estate assets in the US. On 11 November Tsai’s joint trustees, Begbies Traynor partners Nicholas Reed and Julie Palmer , filed two Chapter 15 petitions before the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida – one under his own name and another under the name of Changtel Solutions UK (Changtel), his former company. Leyza B. Florin , a shareholder at Sequor Law in Miami, is acting for the joint trustees. Fraud and freezing The UK’s tax authority, HMRC, sought Changtel’s winding-up in 2013 after challenging its VAT returns and alleging a shortfall of £15.5 million (US$20 million). It accused Changtel, a company which distributed computer hardware and software within the UK and ostensibly exported goods to the rest of the European Union, of carousel fraud over the shortfall. Although the English High Court initially rejected the winding-up petition, the Court of Appeal eventually found that Changtel had “misled” a tax tribunal and judge into thinking that it was solvent “when in fact it had been running down its business since mid-2013”. A tribunal later determined that a fabricated scheme for VAT evasion had been established within the company. The High Court then appointed Reed and Palmer as joint liquidators over Changtel in June 2015. Later, in May 2019, Reed was appointed as Changtel’s bank trustee along with fellow Begbies Traynor partner Joanne Wright . The liquidators’ investigations determined that Tsai committed fraud of an approximate value of £38 million (US$49 million). The English High Court found that Tsai had used “cheque fraud” to extract funds from Changtel – fabricating cheques made out to his sister from a fake Taiwanese supplier, and signed by Tsai himself, to the amount of £3.5 million (US$4.5 million). Tsai’s own bankruptcy came in 2018, after he was jailed for 18 months for contempt of court after breaching a freezing order , and failed to pay a consequential interim payment order. In a July 2017 ruling, Mrs. Justice Vivien Rose in the English High Court found Tsai guilty of 30 out of an alleged 52 breaches of the freezing order. The court found that, although Tsai’s UK passport had been confiscated under the freezing order, he kept hold of a Taiwanese passport which he used to travel to Taiwan. There he arranged for his wife to move £8.6 million (US$11 million) from a DBS bank account in Singapore to a Taipei Fubon bank account in Hong Kong. In delivering her verdict, Mrs Justice Rose described Tsai as a “thoroughly dishonest witness”, and issued with him with the interim payment order. He was adjudged bankrupt in May 2018 after failing to pay the order. Asset recovery In their Chapter 15 application the liquidators said they had discovered several real estate assets in the United States – including five in Las Vegas and one in Los Angeles – that might beneficially belong to either Tsai or Changtel through local companies. They also found evidence that funds had been misappropriated from Changtel and transferred to US bank accounts in the names of Tsai and other family members. They told the Miami court they are attempting to recover £9.95 million (US$ 12.2 million) in post-liquidation payments Changtel made to Entanet International, another Tsai company, to which all Changtel business was transferred prior to liquidation. The liquidators said Tsai’s international assets had been unearthed after a litany of contradictory disclosures of assets on his part. Although in his initial February 2017 disclosure Tsai claimed to have under £1 million (US$1.3 million) he admitted to further assets the further month after retaining counsel from London firm Brett Wilson. But in May that year, after terminating that firm in favor of Neil Davies & Partners, he retracted his previous disclosure, which he said he had admitted to on the basis of erroneous advice from Brett Wilson. “In doing so,” the liquidators said, “Tsai inadvertently waived privilege in his communications with Brett Wilson”, which showed his disclosures had not in fact been based on erroneous advice. As well as the Las Vegas and Los Angeles properties, the liquidators said the English court had found Tsai to hold misappropriated funds in Hong Kong and Singaporean accounts as well as owning three properties in the UK city of Birmingham and one in Telford, Shropshire under his sister’s name. In the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Miami In re Changtel Solutions UK Limited In re Ji-Chuen Jason Tsai [Case 19-25250] Foreign Representative Sequor Law Shareholder Leyza B. Florin in Miami In the High Court of Justice (Chancery Division) Mrs Justice Vivien Rose Joint liquidators of Changtel Begbies Traynor Regional managing partner Julie Palmer in Salisbury and Nicholas Reed in Leeds Counsel to the joint liquidators Stephen Robins of counsel, South Square Chambers Instructed by: Walker Morris Counsel to Ji-Chuen Jason Tsai Andrew Young of counsel Instructed by: Neil Davies & Partners 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's March 2019 wins include a $22M civil theft judgment against a fraudulent Curacao scheme, a Chapter 15 revenue rule victory, and a successful appellate defense for First Citizens Bank. Recent Wins – March 2019 Open Case Results Open February 28, 2019 2 minutes read Sequor Law Sequor Law founding shareholder, Ed Davis , and attorney Nyana Miller , together with other members of the Sequor Law team, recently secured a $22 million civil theft judgment for a South American finance company. The client had lost $8.6 million to the thief, who attempted to hide behind a complex scheme involving a Curacao investment fund, the fund’s professional managers, several brokers, and a corporate entity that received the moneys as custodian for another entity. After years of litigation (including an appeal relating to service of process that was heard by the Venezuelan Supreme Court), the trial court found the corporate custodian and the individual who controlled that company liable for unjust enrichment, conversion, fraud and civil theft. Greg Grossman and Nyana Miller faced an issue of first impression regarding the revenue rule and Chapter 15 of the US Bankruptcy Code. The revenue rule is the common law principle that one sovereign does not collect or enforce the taxes of another (absent an exception, such as a tax treaty). In a cross border bankruptcy case where the largest creditor is the foreign tax agency and the debtor argues that the bankruptcy was a means of enforcing foreign tax claims, Sequor defeated a motion to dismiss the Chapter 15 case. Judge Delano of the US Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Florida held that a court in a chapter 15 case does not administer claims and therefore recognition of a foreign proceeding cannot violate the revenue rule. The Fourth District Court of Appeals affirmed a final judgment entered in favor of First Citizens Bank & Trust Company, N.A., represented by Greg Grossman and Dan Coyle of Sequor Law. The Court rejected the appellants’ arguments that causes of action against the borrowers and guarantors for breach of note and breach of guarantees could not have been assigned by the FDIC, on behalf of Sun American Bank, to First Citizens after Sun American Bank had obtained a final judgment of foreclosure. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight 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.

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

A look at 8 Florida cases to watch in 2019, covering remote employee jurisdiction, Ponzi scheme clawbacks, the Parkland shooting lawsuit, and EB-5 investment fraud, among other key legal battles. 8 Florida Cases to Watch in 2019 Open In the News Open January 9, 2019 4 minutes read Sequor Law At the top of 2019, which Florida cases have lawyers checking dockets with bated breath? Here’s a look at eight cases that have gripped local litigators. Where… By Raychel Lean At the top of 2019, which Florida cases have lawyers checking dockets with bated breath? Here’s a look at eight cases that have gripped local litigators. Where can a Florida-based company sue its out-of-state employees? Miami business litigator Eric Ostroff, partner at Meland Russin & Budwick, has his eye on Citrix Systems Inc. v. Matthew Ware et al . Chief Broward Circuit Judge Jack Tuter will soon hold a hearing on the case, which tackles the question of personal jurisdiction when it comes to remote employees. In 2017, Fort Lauderdale-based tech company Citrix Systems Inc. sued seven former employees who worked from North Carolina when they left to work for a competitor. The suit accused the staff of misappropriating trade secrets and breaching a contract that included a covenant not to compete. But the employees argue Florida doesn’t have jurisdiction over them. Do foreign governments take precedence over state courts? Former Florida Supreme Court Justice Raoul Cantero is among a group of Miami lawyers challenging a Third DCA ruling they say could result in Florida courts having to submit to totalitarian regimes. The Ecuadorean government sued two brothers in Miami for allegedly embezzling about $662 million from Filanbanco, the bank where they were administrators. The suit — Republic of Ecuador v. Roberto Isaias Dassum and William Isaias Dassum — was initially dismissed for lack of standing and expired statute of limitations, but the appeals court reversed the move. International litigator Arnoldo B. Lacayo of Sequor Law, Miami, said the case is a crucial one for international practitioners, as it asks whether acts in another sovereign state are valid in Florida’s courts. Could this case reveal Bitcoin creator’s identity? Dave Kleiman v. Craig Wright , an $11.4 million bitcoin trial will play out in Miami federal court in September, is almost certain to raise eyebrows. Kleiman’s suit accuses his Australian former business partner of committing forgery and filing false documents to take control of bitcoin. Wright has claimed to be Satoshi Nakamoto, mysterious creator of the cryptocurrency, but that claim has never been verified. Complex litigator Daniel Maland at Kozyak, Tropin and Throckmorton is watching closely and says bitcoin transaction logs indicate that Nakamoto is one of the richest people in the world. According to Alan Rosenberg with Markowitz Ringel Trusty + Hartog, the vast size and scope of the case could serve as a roadmap for future cryptocurrency litigation. Will a key ADA ruling be overturned? Juan Carlos Gil v. Winn Dixie , an Americans with Disabilities Act lawsuit pending in the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, could unravel or affirm a landmark 2017 ruling that found a supermarket’s website violated blind internet users’ rights and laid the groundwork for an influx of website- accessibility lawsuits. The court will consider Winn-Dixie’s appeal that websites are not places of public accommodation and that the supermarket is in compliance with the ADA. Commercial litigators Michael Landen of Kluger Kaplan and Jason Kellogg, partner at Levine Kellogg Lehman Schneider & Grossman, said many of their clients in the business world are waiting in suspense. Can school shooting victims sue rifle makers? The family of a victim of the Parkland shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School on Valentine’s Day in 2017 has sued Smith and Wesson, makers of the AR-15 semi-automatic rifle used in the attack. Miami firm Podhurst Orseck represents the plaintiff. The court heard the defense’s motion to dismiss Jamie Guttenberg et al v. Smith and Wesson in December, and is expected to rule in a few weeks. Has a Miami church breached its lease? The Miami-Dade Property Appraiser has claimed Brickell’s First Presbyterian Church of Miami is violating its religious exemption status by leasing some of its grounds to a for-profit school and food trucks. The case could have wide implications for developers and religious institutions, according to Franklin Zemel, a partner at Saul Ewing Arnstein & Lehr, who represents dozens of churches, synagogues and mosques around the country. The Church claims it’s not leasing but merely “outsourcing” the administration of its school. “Why is the characterization so important? Because in order to qualify for the tax exemption, there must be unity between the owner of the property and the user of the property,” Zemel said. Will Florida courts embrace cannabis? According to Kathi Giddings, deputy chair of Akerman’s Litigation Practice Group, cannabis is set to be a hot topic this year. Several appeals are pending in the First District Court of Appeal concerning the 2016 general election, in which Floridians voted to broaden the use of medical marijuana. The legislature has restricted who can cultivate, process, sell and smoke medical marijuana, but the lawsuits argue otherwise. Akerman represents medical marijuana center Florigrown in one of those cases, and recently obtained an injunction against the Department of Health. Will Florida courts side with EB-5 Investors alleging fraud? A group of 78 Chinese investors sued Nicholas Mastroianni II , a high-profile EB-5 investment broker with ties to former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen. In a Palm Beach Court filing, the plaintiffs claimed Mastroianni cheated them out of almost $100 million in a real estate venture, but Mastroianni has rejected the suit as a “sham.” Jeffrey Schneider, managing partner at Levine Kellogg Lehman Schneider + Grossman, who filed the suit, said the case could send a strong message to the EB-5 industry about promises made to investors. “This case is important at a time when developers have completed their projects and are now expected to return the EB-5 money back that they ‘borrowed’ from the EB-5 investors,” Schneider said. It’s hard to say which way the courts will rule, so observers must stay tuned for updates on these cases throughout the year. 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 Founding Shareholder Edward H. Davis Jr. examines cryptocurrency's impact on asset recovery work, exploring digital technology's positive and negative effects for practitioners. Edward H. Davis Jr. Thought Leaders Interview Open Awards & Recognition Open January 5, 2022 1 minute read Sequor Law Sequor Law Founding Shareholder Edward H. Davis, Jr. shines a spotlight on both the positive and negative aspects of advancements in digital technology such as the rise of cryptocurrency and its effects on the work of asset recovery specialists. 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.

The Eleventh Circuit rules that § 109 eligibility requirements don't apply to Chapter 15 debtors, enabling US recognition of foreign insolvency proceedings regardless of US ties. Win for Sequor Law. 11th Circuit Appeal News Open Case Results Open April 4, 2024 1 minute read Sequor Law NEWS ALERT : Is a foreign debtor in a Chapter 15 case subject to the eligibility requirements for a debtor under 11 U.S.C. § 109? In an important decision, the Eleventh Circuit held that those eligibility requirements—requiring a person to reside, or have a domicile, a place of business, or property in the United States to be a debtor—do not apply to a debtor in a Chapter 15 case. This ruling is of particular importance in the field of cross border insolvency as it permits the recognition of foreign insolvency proceedings in the United States irrespective of the foreign debtor’s ties with the United States. In asset recovery cases, recognition unlocks valuable tools to trace and recover assets, which tools remain available to foreign insolvency practitioners under this decision. Read the decision here or below, and the Law360 media coverage here or below. Congratulations to Leyza B. Florin, Juan J. Mendoza, Christopher A. Noel, and the Sequor Law team for achieving this great result! 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.

IWIRC announces its 2018–2019 board of directors, with Sequor Law's Leyza B. Florin named Secretary of the Executive Board of this global women's insolvency and restructuring organization. IWIRC announces new board of directors Open In the News Open September 24, 2018 4 minutes read Sequor Law By Mohamed Dabo The International Women’s Insolvency and Restructuring Confederation (IWIRC) has announced its newly elected and appointed incoming board of directors for 2018 – 2019. The international networking and professional growth organization, aimed at women in the restructuring and insolvency industries, announced the names of its five-member executive board and its ten-member management committee on 17 September. IWIRC also published the names of its new regional directors, directors at large, as well as its standing committee and vice directors. Carrianne Basler , a managing director at AlixPartners in Chicago who was vice chair, succeeds outgoing chair Jennifer McLemore . Michelle Pickett , a partner at PricewaterhouseCoopers in Toronto, Canada, becomes the new vice chair. McLemore will remain on the board as immediate past chair. The executive board also includes Leyza B. Florin of Sequor Law in Miami as secretary, Jennifer Kimble of New York restructuring firm Prime Clerk as treasurer, and Marjorie Kaufman of Getzler Henrich in Boston as Vice Finance Director. Appointees to the group’s management committee include Tinamarie Feil , president of the California-based BMC Group, who becomes the group’s UNCITRAL committee director. Alexandra Schnapp , a law clerk at the US Bankruptcy Court in Atlanta, is the communications director. Eloise Fardon , a senior associate at Stephenson Harwood in Hong Kong, is now the Asia regional director. Rita Gismondi , an associate at Gianni Origoni Grippo Cappelli & Partners in Rome, is the new Europe regional director. Kelly McDonald , of Shearman & Sterling in New York, is US regional director and Toronto-based Dentons counsel Sara-Ann Van Allen is Canada regional director. Outgoing chair McLemore says, “The composition of the Board speaks to the depth and expertise of our membership base and we look forward to working with these talented women.” In a phone interview, she told GRR the organisation’s focus right now is to bring the international experience to the local level—so that members who are unable to attend international conferences can still have access to those international resources. IWIRC’s newsletter is one resource the organisation is aiming to make more accessible; for example, by using social media to give it a stronger international presence on the internet. Founded in 1993, IWIRC is a not-for-profit organisation currently located in Asia, Europe, and North America and continues to grow. McLemore says IWIRC welcomes the development of new networks in these or new regions. Executive Board (terms ending October 2019) Carrianne Basler, AlixPartners, Chair Michelle Pickett, PricewaterhouseCoopers, Vice Chair Leyza B. Florin , Sequor Law, Secretary Jennifer Kimble, Prime Clerk, Treasurer Marjorie Kaufman, Getzler Henrich & Associates, Vice Finance Director Jennifer McLemore, Christian & Barton, Immediate Past Chair Management Committee (terms ending October 2019) Tinamarie Feil, BMC Group, UNCITRAL Committee Director* Karen Fellowes, DLA Piper, Newsletter Director Terri Freedman, Freedman Law, Program Committee Co-Director Melissa Hager, Morrison & Foerster, US Networks Director Evelyn Meltzer, Pepper Hamilton, Member Services Director Alexandra “CC” Schnapp, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Communications Director Helen Sevenoaks, CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang, Europe Networks Director Carren Shulman, NYU School of Law, UNCITRAL Committee Director* Pooja Sinha, Global Legal Solutions (GLS Law), Asia Networks Director Melaney Wagner, Goodmans, Canada Networks Director Regional Directors (terms ending October 2019) Eloise Fardon, Stephenson Harwood, Asia Regional Director Rita Gismondi, Gianni, Origoni, Grippo, Cappelli & Partners, Europe Regional Director Kelly McDonald, Shearman & Sterling, U.S. Regional Director Sara-Ann Van Allen, Dentons, Canada Regional Director Directors at Large (terms ending October 2019) Jacqui Calderin, Agentis Kelly Beaudin Conlan, Connolly Gallagher Catherine D’Alton, Harney Westwood & Riegels Mary Grace Diehl, former judge, U.S. Bankruptcy Court Rebecca Hume, Kobre & Kim Ericka Johnson, Womble Bond Dickinson Nicole Stefanelli, Cullen and Dykman Blanche Zelmanovich, Ernst & Young Directors at Large (terms ending October 2020) Monica Blacker, BAX Advisors Kristen Siracusa Eustis, Miles & Stockbridge PC Elizabeth Gunn, Virginia Office of the Attorney General Rachel Lao, SSG Capital Management Kerri Mumford, Landis Rath & Cobb Leanne Williams, ThorntonGroutFinnigan Standing Committee Vice-Directors (terms ending October 2019) Valerie Banter-Peo, Buchalter Nemer, Vice Director of Regional Programming* Aisling Dwyer, Maples and Calder, Asia Regional Vice Director* Rosa Evergreen, Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer, Vice Director of Communications and Newsletter* Justine Lau, Mourant Ozannes, Asia Regional Vice Director* Tina Lucas, Banner Bank, Vice Director of Budget* Lauren McKelvey, Odin Feldman & Pittleman, Vice Director of Spring Programs* Tara Schellhorn, Riker Danzig Scherer Hyland & Perretti, Vice Director of Fall Programs* Nellwyn Voorhies, Donlin Recano, Vice Director of Communications and Social Media* Blanche Zelmanovich, Ernst & Young, Vice Director of Member Services* Rita Gismondi, Gianni, Origoni, Grippo, Cappelli & Partners, Europe Regional Director Kelly McDonald, Shearman & Sterling, U.S. Regional Director Sara-Ann Van Allen, Dentons, Canada Regional Director Directors at Large (terms ending October 2019) Jacqui Calderin, Agentis Kelly Beaudin Conlan, Connolly Gallagher Catherine D’Alton, Harney Westwood & Riegels Mary Grace Diehl, former judge, U.S. Bankruptcy Court Rebecca Hume, Kobre & Kim Ericka Johnson, Womble Bond Dickinson Nicole Stefanelli, Cullen and Dykman Blanche Zelmanovich, Ernst & Young Directors at Large (terms ending October 2020) Monica Blacker, BAX Advisors Kristen Siracusa Eustis, Miles & Stockbridge PC Elizabeth Gunn, Virginia Office of the Attorney General Rachel Lao, SSG Capital Management Kerri Mumford, Landis Rath & Cobb Leanne Williams, ThorntonGroutFinnigan Standing Committee Vice-Directors (terms ending October 2019) Valerie Banter-Peo, Buchalter Nemer, Vice Director of Regional Programming* Aisling Dwyer, Maples and Calder, Asia Regional Vice Director* Blanche Zelmanovich, Ernst & Young, Vice Director of Member Services* Rosa Evergreen, Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer, Vice Director of Communications and Newsletter* Justine Lau, Mourant Ozannes, Asia Regional Vice Director* Tina Lucas, Banner Bank, Vice Director of Budget* Lauren McKelvey, Odin Feldman & Pittleman, Vice Director of Spring Programs* Tara Schellhorn, Riker Danzig Scherer Hyland & Perretti, Vice Director of Fall Programs* Nellwyn Voorhies, Donlin Recano, Vice Director of Communications and Social Media* Blanche Zelmanovich, Ernst & Young, Vice Director of Member Services* 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.

Florida's Uniform Commercial Real Estate Receivership Act became law on July 1, 2020, with Sequor Law's Leyza B. Florin noting its critical importance amid COVID-19 economic fallout. Uniform Commercial Real Estate Receivership Act is now the Law in Florida Open In the News Open July 10, 2020 4 minutes read Sequor Law By Jim Ash The Uniform Commercial Real Estate Receivership Act became law July 1, marking a new era for Florida courts — and the culmination of four years of relentless diplomacy by the Business Law Section. Given the collateral damage COVID-19 has inflicted on the economy, the timing couldn’t be better, said BLS Executive Council Chair Leyza B. Florin . “It’s a big accomplishment,” Florin said. “Of course, this couldn’t have been anticipated, but with the economic fallout from COVID, and all the closures, the first thing that will be affected when people stop paying their rent is commercial real estate.” Florida is one of only nine states that have adopted UCRERA since 2017. Drafted in 2015 by the National Conference of Commissioners of Uniform State Laws, UCRERA creates a process for state courts to appoint a receiver in disputes that arise over commercial real estate, typically a default. Supporters say that once appointed by the court, a neutral receiver can manage an asset and prevent it from falling into disrepair. Florin offers the example of a waterfront restaurant that goes out of business and is forced to close. Without someone to keep the power on and the air conditioner humming, mold would soon take over, she said. Florida judges have the power to appoint receivers, but before UCRERA, there was no statute that addresses the process for commercial real estate disputes. Florin said the credit belongs to members of the Business Law Section Uniform Commercial Real Estate Receivership Act Task Force. Former Executive Council Chair Jon Polenberg created the taskforce in June 2016. He appointed Miami attorneys Kenneth Murena and Amanda Fernandez, both with Damian Valori, as co-chairs, and asked them to determine whether the proposal was right for Florida and whether the section should support it. From the beginning, UCRERA was a tough sell, even to task force members. “We’re dealing with people who represent both debtors and creditors in the Business Law Section, people who practice on both sides,” Fernandez said. “There was definitely a lot of push back.” “I’m not exaggerating, it took more than a year to build consensus,” Murena said. “We started with the people who were 50-50, and then we worked on the doubters.” Fernandez, who specializes in complex business litigation, is a former chair of the Business Litigation Committee. Murena, who is a federal court-appointed receiver and a receiver’s counsel, has been active in the Bankruptcy/UCC Committee. They worked on their respective constituencies. Murena considers himself one of the UCRERA’s biggest cheerleaders. Whenever the issue arose in one of his cases in state court, Murena said he found himself having to explain the process to judges and other litigants. “It was a lot of educating the parties and the judge on how the receivership should operate, the purpose of the receiver, the benefits of the receiver, and how the receiver can help the court administer the particular assets that were subject to the receivership,” he said. State courts would differ on whether or when to appoint a receiver, Murena said. “There is no well agreed upon body of law that governs receivership across the state of Florida,” he said. “I always thought it would be helpful because the case law in Florida, there is some development, but it is not necessarily so consistent across the state.” Finding consensus within the Business Law Section was only half of the battle, Murena said. The taskforce reached out the Real Property, Probate and Trust Law Section to deal with a host of their concerns, and made a presentation to the RPPTL’s annual conference. A RPPTL liaison was appointed to the taskforce. Some RPPTL members objected to the definition of certain exemptions to a “carve out” for real property, Murena said. Other critics opposed a provision that would have imposed an automatic stay. But the definitions were narrowed, and the automatic stay became permissive instead of mandatory, without weakening the thrust of the legislation, Murena said. “We added in a very specific provision saying this statute does not affect homestead, because that’s sacrosanct in Florida,” Murena said. “We wanted the RPPTLs to not only be okay with this, but to be behind it.” In addition to RPPTL support, the task force also worked with the Florida Bankers Association and the Florida Land and Title Association. The revised version also had to be reviewed by the Uniform Law Commission, which requested more changes, Murena said. Taskforce members say Rep. Mike Beltran, R-Valrico, was an enthusiastic and engaged sponsor. Beltran, an attorney, is a member of the Judiciary Committee. “I actually had a case, and this is a real problem,” Beltran said. “We had a commercial landlord, they went through multiple bankruptcies, they didn’t complete their bankruptcy plan, and they were pocketing the rent, and this bill prevents the debtor in possession from pocketing rents to the detriment of the landlord.” HB 783 and a companion, SB 660 by Sen. Lori Berman, D-Boynton Beach, passed both chambers unanimously. “There were an amazing amount of voices and interests that had to be heard, it’s definitely a step-by-step process,” Murena said. “To me, it was sort of like, where there’s a will there’s a way — you just have to be patient.” The Business Law Section is sponsoring a CLE, “Course 3922: Florida’s Commercial Real Estate Receivership Law Substantively Changes July 1, 2020, Are You Prepared?” on July 30. Featured panelists include U.S. Bankruptcy Court Judge Mindy Mora, of Florida’s Southern District, Second District Court of Appeal Judge Edward LaRose, Manuel Farach, and Kenneth Murena. Click here to read the original article . Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open 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.