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 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. Firm News Jan 13, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Expands Washington, D.C. Office with Addition of David Short Sequor Law expands its Washington, D.C. office with the addition of David Short, strengthening its cross-border litigation, asset recovery. Firm News Jan 12, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Expands Asset Recovery Practice With the Addition of Attorneys Michael Hanlon and Noah Rosenblum Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Michael Hanlon and Noah Rosenblum have joined the firm as attorneys further strengthening the firm’s. Attorney Spotlight Oct 9, 2025 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know David Short 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.

Who’s Who Legal recognizes Sequor Law founding shareholder Edward H. Davis, Jr. as a Thought Leader. He discusses boutique focus, asset recovery, and major Ponzi cases. Edward H. Davis, Jr., selected as a Who’s Who Legal Thought Leader Open Awards & Recognition Open November 30, 2017 4 minutes read Sequor Law Who’s Who Legal: Thought Leaders 2018 brings together the insight, expertise and wisdom of some of the world’s foremost lawyers in a single book. This year’s edition features Q&As with 67 eminent practitioners across 22 practice areas. These lawyers obtained the highest number of nominations from peers, corporate counsel and other market sources in our most recent research cycle. Edward H. Davis, Jr. Questions and Answers: Who’s Who Legal Thought Leaders: Asset Recovery Edward H Davis, Jr, a founding shareholder of the international law firm Astigarraga Davis, heads the firm’s asset recovery and financial fraud group which represents victims of serious fraud and grand corruption including governments, corporations, insolvency practitioners and individuals by investigating and prosecuting civil fraud and asset recovery actions. Who’s Who Legal: Asset Recovery has recognised Davis as the global Asset Recovery Lawyer of the Year from 2013 to 2016, and his firm as Asset Recovery Firm of the Year for 2015 and 2016. WHY DID YOU DECIDE TO SPECIALISE IN ASSET RECOVERY AND FRAUD WORK? I enjoy representing victims and helping them level the playing field with those that prey on them. As a result, I decided to focus my practice on the representation of individual, corporate and governmental victims of fraud throughout the world. I also enjoy learning about other legal cultures, and asset recovery and fraud work is a specialised form of international litigation. Lastly, I enjoy the “hunt” for those that have committed fraud and their ill-gotten gains. WHAT PROMPTED YOU TO FOUND YOUR OWN FIRM? My partners and I were seeking a better way to serve our clients in response to new factors in the industry affecting both the legal profession and our clients. Having a specialised boutique allows us to employ our “power of focus” concept and truly focus deeply on our practice groups and developments in the law to a degree that might not be attainable in a more generalised platform. Also, our boutique setting is nimbler and more cost-effective than that of many other firms, and allows us to take cases on alternative fee structures. WHAT MAKES FOR A SUCCESSFUL ASSET RECOVERY SPECIALIST? The actions taken in the first days following the discovery of a fraud often will determine whether the misappropriated funds or other property are ultimately recovered. Our team responds quickly to such fraud by using emergency injunctions, expedited depositions, subpoenas of bank records, our vast connections to experienced professionals and investigators around the world to seek to either locate the assets before they are dissipated or to investigate and bring claims against third parties who assisted the fraudsters. WHAT IS THE MOST MEMORABLE MATTER THAT YOU’VE WORKED ON TO DATE? Stanford International Bank, Ltd was an Antiguan bank that sold phony certificates of deposit to 21,000 depositors, which resulted in the second-largest Ponzi scheme in history by causing losses to over 27,000 depositor-victims from around the world. Estimated losses by depositor-victims exceeded $5 billion. WHAT CHALLENGES ARE FACING PRACTITIONERS AT THE MOMENT AND HOW IS YOUR FIRM LOOKING TO MEET THESE OBSTACLES? The pressure from clients to keep legal fees and costs as low as possible continues to be one of the challenges affecting practitioners. This can be a problem because of the crisis-like atmosphere in which successful asset recovery practitioners function. We combat these challenges by working closely with investigators, computer forensic experts, foreign lawyers, forensic accountants, law enforcement and other experts. These professionals are key resources in a rapid response to a discovered fraud which can lead to escalated costs (such as cost bonds) which would not be the norm in another practice area. Our firm has been meeting this particular challenge by offering alternative fee arrangements when historically the standard was solely hourly fee billing, and by working with litigation funders that assist victims of fraud who usually don’t have the resources to fight the fraudster after the fraud. DO YOU ANTICIPATE THAT THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY’S INCREASING READINESS TO TACKLE CORRUPTION WILL LEAD TO GROWING INTEREST IN ASSET RECOVERY WORK IN THE WIDER LEGAL MARKET? Yes, as technology continues to get more sophisticated, the speed of the movement of money throughout the world will likewise increase. This, combined with a growing awareness that national borders are no more an impediment to recovery than they are to the fraudster who moves across those same borders, will likely result in the interest in asset recovery work growing into a larger distinct legal market. We already see firms forming asset recovery departments and groups which is a signal that that the market is recognising this distinct practice area as an exciting new offering to their clients. HOW IMPORTANT ARE ORGANISATIONS SUCH THE ICC COMMERCIAL CRIMES SERVICES’ FRAUDNET NETWORK IN INTERNATIONAL ASSET RECOVERY WORK? Organizations like the ICC’s FraudNet are very important and necessary in the international asset recovery work. Fraudsters work using their own networks of cronies and those that provide them assistance – legal and otherwise. So it is essential that counter-networks operate at a high level of coordination to defeat them. They also are powerful change agents that raise awareness and educate fraud victims worldwide about the methods that can be deployed to assist them in their fight to recover their assets and damages. AS HEAD OF THE FIRM’S ASSET RECOVERY AND FINANCIAL FRAUD PRACTICE, IN WHAT WAYS ARE YOU ATTEMPTING TO DISTINGUISH YOUR GROUP FROM OTHER COMPETITORS IN THE MARKET? I work on creating innovative solutions. I’ve helped develop and expand various creative discovery and asset seizure methodologies to obtain recoveries for our clients. Additionally, I’ve both led and worked collaboratively on various civil asset recovery teams – another concept I helped pioneer – on cross-border asset recovery engagements. Having a strong commercial litigation and insolvency background, my team and I have championed and coordinated asset recovery efforts between civil and criminal systems as a means to penetrate and defeat complex opaque asset hiding structures used by fraudsters. I was recently mentioned by Latin Lawyer (2016) for my efforts in the area of asset recovery. Lastly, as a result of our efforts, I was also recognised as the global Asset Recovery Lawyer of the Year by Who’s Who Legal: Asset Recovery, in 2013 (and again in 2014, 2015 and 2016); my firm was recognised as the Asset Recovery Firm of the Year in 2015 and 2016 by the same publication. View PDF Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight 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. Firm News Jan 13, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Expands Washington, D.C. Office with Addition of David Short Sequor Law expands its Washington, D.C. office with the addition of David Short, strengthening its cross-border litigation, asset recovery. Firm News Jan 12, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Expands Asset Recovery Practice With the Addition of Attorneys Michael Hanlon and Noah Rosenblum Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Michael Hanlon and Noah Rosenblum have joined the firm as attorneys further strengthening the firm’s. Attorney Spotlight Oct 9, 2025 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know David Short 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.

A Florida bankruptcy judge preliminarily approved an $8 million settlement resolving Banco Santos’ racketeering and fraud claims against Espirito Santo Bank. Fla. Judge OKs Espírito Santo’s $8M Deal With Bankrupt Bank Open In the News Open December 23, 2014 2 minutes read Sequor Law By Carolina Bolado A Florida bankruptcy judge on Tuesday indicated that she would sign off on an $8 million settlement ending bankrupt Brazilian bank Banco Santos SA’s racketeering and tort suit against Portugal-based Espirito Santo Bank. In a hearing in Miami, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Laurel Isicoff said she would sign off on an order preliminarily approving a deal that resolves a suit filed by Banco Santos’ court-appointed administrator, Vanio Cesar Pickler Aguiar, claiming the bank lost $38.7 million through ESB’s fraud and money laundering. The judge noted that there were no objections filed to the settlement agreement and urged the attorneys to get the order in quickly so that she could sign off on it before the holiday break. In the adversary proceeding, filed in December 2013, Aguiar claims that ESB diverted millions in Banco Santos’ assets through various corporate entities to Florida, from which they were transferred offshore and laundered, according to the complaint. In the suit, Aguiar requested not just the $38.7 million the bank allegedly lost, but also treble damages of $116 million. ESB rebuts all of the claims in the complaint. Banco Santos was ordered into a court-supervised liquidation by the Second Bankruptcy and Judicial Reorganization Court of Sao Paulo in September 2005. Aguiar filed a Chapter 15 petition in December 2010 in the Southern District of Florida listing $500 million to $1 billion in assets and more than $1 billion in liabilities. The Espirito Santo group, which traces to a storied Portuguese banking family, saw four of its companies file for creditor protection in July after a central bank audit two months earlier had turned up accounting irregularities at Espirito Santo International SA, the group’s holding company. The Portuguese central bank in August unveiled a plan to split up BES, the country’s second-largest lender, under a rescue plan backed by €4.9 billion ($6.4 billion) in state money after the bank failed to weather losses on its exposure to the Espirito Santo group. Authorities in several countries are investigating the dealings of the Espirito Santo empire. Switzerland’s financial regulator said in September that it is looking into the distribution of financial products by a Swiss bank, Banque Privee Espirito Santo SA, which is tied to the Espirito Santo group. Aguiar is represented by Edward H. Davis Jr. , Gregory S. Grossman , Arnoldo B. Lacayo and Nyana A. Miller of Astigarraga Davis . ESB is represented by Samuel J. Capuano and Gary M. Freedman of Tabas Freedman . The adversary proceeding is Aguiar v. Espirito Santo Bank, case number 1:13-ap-01934, in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida. The bankruptcy is In re: Banco Santos SA, case number 1:10-bk-47543, in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida. Click to view full article. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open 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. Firm News Jan 13, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Expands Washington, D.C. Office with Addition of David Short Sequor Law expands its Washington, D.C. office with the addition of David Short, strengthening its cross-border litigation, asset recovery. Firm News Jan 12, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Expands Asset Recovery Practice With the Addition of Attorneys Michael Hanlon and Noah Rosenblum Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Michael Hanlon and Noah Rosenblum have joined the firm as attorneys further strengthening the firm’s. Attorney Spotlight Oct 9, 2025 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know David Short 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.

Hong Kong liquidators of Dingway Investment Limited obtain pre-recognition emergency discovery relief in Miami's Bankruptcy Court under Chapter 15 regarding a disputed Miami property. Dingway case in GRR Open In the News Open February 8, 2022 6 minutes read Sequor Law Hong Kong liquidators obtain pre-recognition discovery relief in Miami A Hong Kong headquartered, British Virgin Islands-incorporated company’s provisional liquidators have obtained emergency relief in the US to conduct discovery on a property it used to own in Miami, which they allege has been wrongfully transferred at least three times in the last three years. On 3 February, Chief Bankruptcy Judge Laurel M Isicoff in the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida, granted an emergency motion allowing the liquidators of Dingway Investment Limited, Teneo’s Russel Crumpler in the BVI and KPMG’s Fergal Power in Hong Kong, to conduct proposed discovery under federal and local bankruptcy rules in the US, before they are formally recognised under Chapter 15. The pair submitted a recognition petition before the Miami court on 27 January, just three days after a Hong Kong court opened a winding-up petition against Dingway at the request of its majority shareholder, Hong Kong-based China City Construction International (China City). China City itself has also been in a creditor’s voluntary liquidation in Hong Kong since January 2019, and is currently being managed by KPMG’s global head of restructuring services Patrick Cowley and partner Lui Yee Man as liquidators. Cowley, Lui and KPMG director Christopher Ball are also currently sitting as three of Dingway’s five directors. In a declaration supporting Dingway’s Chapter 15 application, Crumpler explains that Dingway was incorporated in 2014 to indirectly purchase a “substantial” vacant land site in Miami’s Brickell Financial District through three intermediate Delaware companies. At the time of the purchase, an entity called China City Construction & Development Co (CCCDHK) funded the US$86.7 million purchase price for the property, in return for an equivalent reduction to a US$204 million debt it owned to China City. The latter then passed the funds down the structure to the titleholder of the Miami property by way of a series of shareholder loans. In October 2015, an entity called Champ Prestige took a 45% interest in Dingway for just over US$40 million, leaving China City with the remaining 55%. Three years later, CCDHK brought an unsuccessful claim against China City in the Hong Kong High Court, arguing that China City had always held its shares in Dingway and the US$40 million that Champ Prestige had paid for its interest, on trust for CCCDHK. It sought an order for China City to transfer the legal ownership of its shares and the money to CCDHK, but the court declined to grant the relief and CCCDHK discontinued the proceedings in December 2019. Crumpler notes in his declaration that investigations by China City’s liquidators, Cowley and Lui, suggest CCCDHK and China City are ultimately controlled by the same people associated with a mainland Chinese company called China City Development Academy (CCDA). CCDA indirectly held an interest in China City until April 2016 and obtained an indirect interest in CCCDHK in July of the same year. Despite one ownership interest ceasing before the other commenced, the same people seemed to exert a measure of control over both entities at all material times, China City’s liquidators claimed. In particular, City City’s liquidators told Crumpler that an individual named Zeng Yuqi seemed to be a common director of China City and CCCDHK between February and September 2018, while another director of CCCDHK, Sze Wai Suen, was an authorised signatory for certain China City accounts as late as September 2016, among other things. Crumpler claims that Zeng, acting as a “rogue director” and without authorisation from Dingway’s board or shareholders, signed an agreement in October 2019 to transfer its interests in the Delaware ownership structure and the Miami property to CCCDHK, for no consideration. He says Sze signed the agreement on CCCDHK’s behalf. The provisional liquidator claims CCCDHK then sold the Delaware structure and Miami property to a Californian entity in November 2019 for US$70 million, with Sze as signatory again. Crumpler says Champ Prestige, as Dingway’s minority shareholder, was initially prepared to cooperate with China City’s liquidators to try to retrieve its interest in the Miami property. But in March 2020, Cowley and Lui learned that Champ Prestige itself had been sold to CCCDHK for US$44 million. Finally, on 30 December last year, Crumpler notes Cowley and Lui found out through an online news article that the Miami property had been sold again – this time for US$103 million to an entity belonging to Miami real estate investment firm Mast Capital and Boston private equity group Rockpoint. The news article in the South Florida Business Journal reported that the property had been “seized” following “a legal battle with the previous owner”. Submitted at the same time as their Chapter 15 application, Crumpler and Power asked the Miami district court for emergency provisional relief so they could investigate the latest transaction with Mast Capital and Rockpoint. Specifically, they asked permission to issue and serve pre-recognition subpoenas for the production of documents on the two new acquirors and three Delaware entities they used to effectuate the sales, as well as two other Mast Capital companies that may have been involved in the sale. Crumpler and Power argued that the proposed discovery was limited and targeted to obtaining information regarding the location of the closing proceeds for the sale. They said they needed relief on an emergency basis to preserve the status quo of Dingway’s estate and prevent “further dissipation” of the Miami property’s proceeds of sale. Granting the provisional relief, Judge Isicoff noted it was “narrowly tailored in scope and duration” and reflected that there were no parties in opposition. The judge also said the “threatened injury” to Dingway’s estate outweighed “whatever damage the requested relief may cause an opposing party”. Champ Prestige proceedings Crumpler explains in his declaration that Champ Prestige originally brought an action in a Miami-Dade County court against China City and the Delaware entity that was the Miami property’s direct owner in June 2019, claiming the majority shareholder had breached its obligations under the sale and purchase agreement through which Champ Prestige had acquired its 45% interest in Dingway. Among other things, Champ Prestige sought to impose and foreclose on an equitable lien on the property, and in December 2019 it secured a temporary injunction from the Miami-Dade court enjoining the land’s disposition. The injunction was expanded in February 2020 to also prevent any indirect dispositions or the sale of any interests in the three Delaware holding companies. But after CCCDHK acquired Champ Prestige it voluntarily dismissed the Miami-Dade action and removed the lis pendens over the property. Crumpler has also recorded that Champ Prestige filed a winding-up petition against Dingway and China City in Hong Kong back in February 2018, but no steps had been taken in the petition since March 2020, when Mr Justice Harris dismissed an application from China City to strike it out on jurisdictional grounds. Crumpler explains in his declaration that Cowley and Lui, as China City’s liquidators, had wanted to try to recover its interest in Dingway and its ultimate 55% interest in the Miami property, but had been unable to take action due to lack of funding, and because of CCCDHK’s action in Hong Kong and the Miami-Dade proceedings. When the Hong Kong court placed Dingway in liquidation, it issued a proprietary injunction against CCCDHK in respect of the US$70 million for the November 2019 sale of the property. It also issued a mareva injunction restraining CCCDHK, Zeng and Sze from dealing with assets of up to US$103 million. The court was due to hold an inter partes hearing in Hong Kong to address Crumpler and Power’s continuing appointment as joint provisional liquidators and the injunctions on 4 February. GRR was unable to ascertain the outcome of that hearing by press time. After they have obtained evidence in aid of their asset recovery efforts, Crumpler and Power intend to file actions and proprietary claims in the US, including claims against third parties in the US that may have damaged Dingway or owe it money. The provisional liquidators have retained Sequor Law partners Fernando Menendez and Gregory Grossman as US counsel. The Chapter 15 bankruptcy court has scheduled a full recognition hearing on 23 February. In the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida Chief Bankruptcy Judge Laurel M Isicoff Counsel to joint provisional liquidators of Dingway Investment Limited Sequor Law Partners Fernando Menendez and Gregory Grossman in Miami In the Hong Kong Court of First Instance In the matter of Dingway Investment Limited Mr Justice Peter Ng Joint provisional liquidators of Dingway Teneo Senior managing director Russel Crumpler in the British Virgin Islands KPMG Partner Fergal Power in Hong Kong Counsel to petitioner China City (in creditors’ voluntary liquidation) and then to joint provisional liquidators Tanner De Witt Senior associate Veronica Chan in Hong Kong Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open 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. Firm News Jan 13, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Expands Washington, D.C. Office with Addition of David Short Sequor Law expands its Washington, D.C. office with the addition of David Short, strengthening its cross-border litigation, asset recovery. Firm News Jan 12, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Expands Asset Recovery Practice With the Addition of Attorneys Michael Hanlon and Noah Rosenblum Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Michael Hanlon and Noah Rosenblum have joined the firm as attorneys further strengthening the firm’s. Attorney Spotlight Oct 9, 2025 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know David Short 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.

BVI liquidators of three funds linked to the 1MDB fraud seek Chapter 15 recognition in Miami to pursue US discovery and recover billions allegedly stolen from Malaysia's sovereign wealth fund. BVI funds linked to 1MDB fraud seek recognition in Miami Open In the News Open April 11, 2022 3 minutes read Sequor Law Ben Clarke The joint liquidators of three British Virgin Islands funds that were allegedly part of a huge fraud perpetrated against Malaysian sovereign wealth fund 1MDB have sought recognition in Miami to further their investigations. In a 5 April filing in the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida, the joint liquidators of SRC International (Malaysia) (SRC BVI) and two subsidiaries sought Chapter 15 recognition of their appointments in the BVI to help recover some of the billions of dollars allegedly stolen from 1MDB. One of the joint liquidators, BVI-based Helen James of Hyperion Risk Solutions, said in court filings that the joint liquidators need to obtain discovery in the US to help with their recovery efforts and investigations into the debtors’ business activities. Authorities have been investigating 1MDB and an entity it established in Malaysia, SRC International (SRC Malaysia), since 2015 over allegations of fraud and money laundering. As part of the scheme, James said numerous entities and individuals formed a network to divert and distribute funds to fraudsters who diverted or siphoned off US$8.5 billion from 1MDB and SRC Malaysia, which is the parent of the three BVI funds. According to James, most investigation attempts in Malaysia were thwarted by the Malaysian government because the country’s Prime Minister, Najib Razak, was the driving force behind the creation of 1MDB. But Najib was removed from office in 2018 and, with other co-conspirators, was subject to criminal and civil proceedings in Malaysia and elsewhere in relation to misappropriation of 1MDB funds. Local authorities later sought cooperation with global law enforcement agencies, including the United States Department of Justice (DOJ), which has actively investigated multiple parties and seized assets in relation to the fraud over the last six years. Last week, a Brooklyn federal court convicted former Goldman Sachs banker Roger Ng for his role in the scandal, which saw Goldman Sachs secure bond transactions worth US$6.5 billion. But James said the DOJ has focused its efforts on 1MDB and not SRC Malaysia, despite the latter losing about US$1.15 billion. The joint liquidators of the three BVI funds – James, Quantuma’s Caribbean head Angela Barkhouse in the Cayman Islands, and chief executive Carl Jackson in the UK – have brought civil proceedings against other companies in multiple jurisdictions since they were appointed in July and August last year. But James said the joint liquidators suspect there are companies and trusts related to the fraud that are yet to be uncovered. “[T]he full extent of the fraud is unknown,” she said. “The liquidation of the debtors forms parts of an international effort to trace and recover funds misappropriated through SRC Malaysia.” James said that throughout its existence SRC BVI has been principally used by fraudsters to misappropriate funds. She also claimed one of the other debtors, Bright Oriande (BOL), is believed to have had no legitimate business activity and was established solely to divert funds from 1MDB and SRC Malaysia. BOL’s existence was apparently concealed from SRC Malaysia’s board. Through their investigations, the joint liquidators have identified a series of suspicious transactions involving the three debtor companies, including over US$1 billion of funds that were transferred from SRC Malaysia to SRC BVI accounts in Hong Kong and Switzerland. The joint liquidators suspect that some of the millions of dollars that are still unaccounted for in relation to the fraud may be in the US. Jones said they need to obtain discovery relating to various transactions to help them trace estate assets and other entities related to the three BVI funds. Judge Robert Mark has listed a recognition hearing for 18 May. In the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida Judge Robert Mark Foreign representatives of SRC International (Malaysia) et al Hyperion Risk Solutions Group head of finance Helen James in the British Virgin Islands Quantuma Caribbean head Angela Barkhouse in the Cayman Islands and chief executive Carl Jackson in Southampton, UK Counsel to joint liquidators of SRC International (Malaysia) et al Sequor Law Shareholder Gregory Grossman and attorney Juan Mendoza in Miami In the British Virgin Islands Commercial Division Joint liquidators of SRC International (Malaysia) et al Hyperion Risk Solutions Group head of finance Helen James in the British Virgin Islands Quantuma Caribbean head Angela Barkhouse in the Cayman Islands and chief executive Carl Jackson in Southampton, UK Counsel to joint liquidators of SRC International (Malaysia) et al Emery Cooke Partner Andrew Emery in the British Virgin Islands 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 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. Firm News Jan 13, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Expands Washington, D.C. Office with Addition of David Short Sequor Law expands its Washington, D.C. office with the addition of David Short, strengthening its cross-border litigation, asset recovery. Firm News Jan 12, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Expands Asset Recovery Practice With the Addition of Attorneys Michael Hanlon and Noah Rosenblum Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Michael Hanlon and Noah Rosenblum have joined the firm as attorneys further strengthening the firm’s. Attorney Spotlight Oct 9, 2025 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know David Short 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.

Sequor Law's Arnoldo Lacayo represents the administrator of bankrupt Brazilian magazine publisher Minuano in a Chapter 15 filing in Florida to uncover assets hidden in the US by its former owners. Brazilian magazine group enters Chapter 15 in Florida Open In the News Open October 7, 2019 2 minutes read Sequor Law By Declan Bush The administrator of a bankrupt Brazilian magazine publishing company has filed for Chapter 15 protection to search for assets its old owners may have stashed in the US. Four entities – Minuano Comunicações e Produções Editorias, Diário de São Paulo Comunicações, Editora Fontana and Cereja Serviços de Midia Digital – filed a slew of documents before the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida dated 25 September. Arnoldo Lacayo , a partner at Sequor Law specialising in financial fraud and asset recovery cases, is the debtors’ counsel in Miami. In a declaration to the US court filed on 1 October, Brazilian administrator Joice Ruiz Bernier , of São Paulo firm AJ Ruiz Consultaria Empresarial, said the Minuano companies were part of a publishing group owned by Spanish businessman Mario Florencio Cuesta and his ex-wife Giane Viana Cuesta. The Cuestas divorced in 2012. Minuano was a big magazine publisher started in Brazil in 2004, which grew to include assets including longstanding newspaper Diario de São Paulo. The first of Minuano companies went bankrupt in São Paulo in April 2017 after a creditors’ petition seven months before, the court was told. The other debtors were added to the Brazilian proceeding in January 2018 when it emerged they were run out of the same office and had commingled funds. The debtors appealed the extension of the bankruptcy, but the Brazilian Court of Appeals in São Paulo affirmed it in June 2018. As further entities and individuals were brought into the bankruptcy proceedings, the court made an order freezing the Cuesta’s assets, and those of five others and four of their companies on 8 October 2018. By that stage, Bernier had already seized assets including a helicopter owned by the newspaper for the bankruptcy estate. Bernier said her investigations had revealed the Cuestas were the debtors’ ultimate beneficial owners and had instructed the group’s directors on how to proceed, despite not being identified as shareholders. “The Cuestas financed a lavish lifestyle through the use of the debtors’ assets, monetary and physical,” Bernier has told the US court in her declaration. “Investigations into the Debtors suggest that assets were diverted overseas to banks in Miami and New York.” She says she intends to investigate the nature and extent of any of the debtors’ activities and assets in the US, as well as any assets bought with their funds. A hearing has been set for 13 November. In the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida Minuano Comunicações e Produções Editorias, Diário de São Paulo Comunicações, Editora Fontana and Cereja Serviços de Midia Digital, case 19-23184-LMI Judge Laurel Isicoff Counsel to Minuano Sequor Law Partner Arnoldo Lacayo and attorney Bruno de Camargo in Miami In the Second Bankruptcy Court for the State of São Paulo Judge Marcelo Barbosa Sacramone Administrator to Minuano AJ Ruiz Consultoria Empresarial* Partner Joice Ruiz Bernier in São Paulo *Formerly Satiro e Ruiz Advogados Associados 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 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. Firm News Jan 13, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Expands Washington, D.C. Office with Addition of David Short Sequor Law expands its Washington, D.C. office with the addition of David Short, strengthening its cross-border litigation, asset recovery. Firm News Jan 12, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Expands Asset Recovery Practice With the Addition of Attorneys Michael Hanlon and Noah Rosenblum Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Michael Hanlon and Noah Rosenblum have joined the firm as attorneys further strengthening the firm’s. Attorney Spotlight Oct 9, 2025 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know David Short 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.

Sequor Law is recognized in Global Restructuring Review’s GRR 100 guide as a leading cross-border restructuring and insolvency law firm. Sequor Law Listed Among World’s Top 100 Cross-Border Restructuring and Insolvency Law Firms Open Awards & Recognition Open August 11, 2017 1 minute read Sequor Law Sequor Law is proud to be listed among the world’s 100 top cross-border restructuring and insolvency law firms in the Global Restructuring Review’s "GRR 100," a new annual guide. The guide recognizes our firm for its representation of insolvency estates and receiverships for international banks, sovereign governments and government institutions, multi-national corporations, and individuals where it represents insolvency practitioners from around the world, both in the United States and overseas multi-jurisdictional insolvencies around the world. The guide also recognizes Sequor Law for making over 20 Chapter 15 filings in the U.S. to recognize insolvency proceedings in diverse jurisdictions worldwide, filing more Chapter 15s than any other U.S. law firm. Firm co-founders Edward Davis and Greg Grossman are noted for many achievements in the guide, ranging from filing the first Chapter 15 bankruptcy petition in Florida to representing the joint liquidators of Stanford International Bank to recover assets for a $7 billion Ponzi scheme, the second-largest Ponzi scheme in the world. During the research period for the guide, the firm was instructed as counsel to the court-appointed liquidator and foreign representative of bankrupt Chilean investment firm Onix Capital, seeking to recover assets in excess of $100 million* from an alleged Ponzi scheme operated by Onix’s CEO. Our sincere thanks to our clients and colleagues for the opportunity to do what we love and earn so many distinguished awards and recognitions along the way. Indeed, 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. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open 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. Firm News Jan 13, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Expands Washington, D.C. Office with Addition of David Short Sequor Law expands its Washington, D.C. office with the addition of David Short, strengthening its cross-border litigation, asset recovery. Firm News Jan 12, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Expands Asset Recovery Practice With the Addition of Attorneys Michael Hanlon and Noah Rosenblum Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Michael Hanlon and Noah Rosenblum have joined the firm as attorneys further strengthening the firm’s. Attorney Spotlight Oct 9, 2025 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know David Short 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.

Cryptocurrency is becoming a new frontier for hiding assets in divorce cases. Sequor Law's Edward Davis warns that crypto-based financial infidelity will become increasingly common in coming years. How cryptocurrency assets are becoming a new battleground in divorce disputes Open In the News Open March 10, 2019 5 minutes read Sequor Law By Kelly Anne Smith Fighting over money is one thing; dealing with bitcoin and other types of cryptocurrency in a divorce is an entirely different story. As cryptocurrency has surged in popularity, it’s become much more common for investors to carry shares in the largely unregulated market. For married couples looking to part ways, this means dealing with cryptocurrency as an asset could make for a difficult and lengthy divorce process. Considering regulations and standards on digital currencies such as bitcoin are still being weighed by governments and financial regulators across the world, could the future of hiding assets during a nasty divorce be lying in its hands? The role cryptocurrency is beginning to play in divorces Cryptocurrency is virtual currency; it lives online and is traded on a blockchain, an encrypted ledger detailing transactions. Since each transaction is associated with a public and private key, it’s possible for each transaction to be traced back to a single individual. Cryptocurrency has been around for about a decade, but it became more mainstream around 2017 when bitcoin skyrocketed to a price of $20,000 per coin and caught the public eye, before giving back much of its value in the time since. In 2018, only 5 percent of the American population held cryptocurrency, according to a survey by the Global Blockchain Business Council. An additional 21 percent of respondents, however, said they were considering adding it to their portfolio. As cryptocurrency grows in popularity, lawyers all over the world are beginning to face divorce cases with high-value disputes over these digital assets. Jacqueline Newman, a New York-based matrimonial law attorney, represents all different types of clients, including those divorcing with cryptocurrency. She asks all of her clients to fill out a statement of net worth — a comprehensive document detailing income, assets and debt of each party. She says her forms now ask parties to include cryptocurrency, too. “It hasn’t gotten to the point where the court forms include it yet, but we have asked on ours and people list it under their general assets,” Newman says. Hiding assets: Is cryptocurrency a new way to do it? Since bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are largely unregulated and encrypted, some might think it’s a perfect place to anonymously stash away funds. But that’s not necessarily the case. Mark DiMichael, CPA, certified Financial Forensics accountant and fraud examiner, specializes in cryptocurrency. In one recent case, a husband didn’t report $100,000-plus in cryptocurrency assets on his statement of net worth. During the discovery process, DiMichael closely analyzed his bank statements and was able to trace the crypto transactions through a crypto-trading platform. DiMichael warns, however, that cases can get more complicated. The more knowledgeable someone is in crypto, the bigger the threat they pose to successfully hiding the assets. Although he hasn’t worked on a large number of cases involving cryptocurrency so far, DiMichael gives the example of a cybersecurity expert exchanging cash for bitcoin as payment. By conducting the transaction in person, there would be no “proof” of the transaction occurring — making the asset-hiding much more difficult to reveal to the court. “It’s really hard to trace if the individual knows what they’re doing,” DiMichael says. “An expert is going to know not to leave any evidence on their computer, and it can be much more difficult to subpoena.” The future of spouses hiding money in crypto should be seen as a threat Edward Davis , a Miami-based asset-recovery attorney and founding shareholder of Sequor Law, says cases of financial infidelity involving crypto are only going to become more frequent in the coming years. In 15 to 20 years, Davis expects people with large sums of money to turn toward cryptocurrency as a way to hide their assets. “It’s a real threat,” Davis says. “It’s not going to come up in the average divorce of Joe versus Mary where they both have regular jobs and are a middle class family. But the wealthy and uber-wealthy who have access to this are going to use it to hide their value.” Matrimonial attorneys interviewed for this story say there aren’t currently any specific laws regarding cryptocurrency protection during a divorce process. Davis says these laws to protect consumers from fraudulent crypto activity are likely coming, but they will be slow to implement. “The legal infrastructure and regulatory infrastructure for this stuff is way behind,” Davis says. “If you look at some of the people sitting in Congress — some of them are in their 70s and 80s — they have no idea what this is. They don’t even know what Snapchat is. You’re talking about a generational change [that] is going to [have to] happen before people are confronting this kind of issue.” Another issue for getting a hand on regulating crypto, Davis says, is that there’s a wide misunderstanding of how blockchain technology works. “Whenever something new comes along, everyone tends to minimize it,” Davis says. “Predicting technology is a very hard thing. People who are intimidated or scared or don’t understand technology tend to minimize it.” How the financial and divorce industries are adjusting to this rising trend As interest and commonality surrounding crypto continues to increase, experts in the legal field are having to quickly educate themselves on the asset to keep up. Some experts say there isn’t enough being done to inform and train legal counsel on the inner workings of the asset. Most of what DiMichael knows about crypto is self-taught. In 2018, DiMichael published “A Forensic Guide to Finding Cryptocurrency in Divorce Litigation.” He created the guide after his own research found there weren’t many resources available on the matter. “I’ve seen some courses for it, but I think there should be more training,” DiMichael says. “Uncovering crypto is fairly complicated, and that can be even harder for someone not trained in crypto.” Most accountants don’t understand cryptocurrency, DiMichael adds. More complicated divorce cases involving cryptocurrency can be a lengthy and complicated process — and for an accountant learning everything on the fly, this can mean longer hours and a higher bill for the client. DiMichael says that he currently charges $435 per hour. Davis hasn’t worked directly on a case recovering cryptocurrency assets yet, but he has noticed an upswing in industry-related conversations in the past two years. Lawyers, who he says aren’t technology-savvy by nature, should pay close attention to cryptocurrency and educate themselves on how to manage it in court cases. “The main concern about crypto is how little we understand it and how dangerous it is because it’s an unregulated, untethered currency,” Davis says. “This is a real threat and one we have to think about.” Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open 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. Firm News Jan 13, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Expands Washington, D.C. Office with Addition of David Short Sequor Law expands its Washington, D.C. office with the addition of David Short, strengthening its cross-border litigation, asset recovery. Firm News Jan 12, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Expands Asset Recovery Practice With the Addition of Attorneys Michael Hanlon and Noah Rosenblum Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Michael Hanlon and Noah Rosenblum have joined the firm as attorneys further strengthening the firm’s. Attorney Spotlight Oct 9, 2025 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know David Short 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.

Sequor Law successfully defends a $19.5 million injunction protecting offshore-dissipated escrow funds, affirmed by Florida's Third District Court of Appeals in February 2019. Third District Court of Appeals Affirms $19.5 Million Mandatory and Prohibitory Temporary Injunction Order in Case No. 17-01358 CA 22 – Hakim v. Tawil et al. Open Case Results Open June 17, 2020 1 minute read Sequor Law Sequor Law represented the Plaintiff in successfully obtaining a $19.5 million temporary mandatory and prohibitory injunction to protect the res of a constructive trust claim, which funds had been dissipated from Miami escrow accounts to offshore accounts during the pendency of the case. The Florida Eleventh Judicial Circuit Complex Business Litigation Court required the Defendants to return the $19.5 million to a Miami escrow account and prohibited further transfer of the funds. The Defendants appealed the adverse injunction order over the escrow funds by arguing, among other things, that the Court should not have entered the injunction without first determining it had personal jurisdiction over the defendants. Sequor Law represented the Plaintiff as Appellee in the appeal. After considering the briefing and oral argument, on February 26, 2019, the Third District Court of Appeal affirmed injunction order in a written opinion. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open 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. Firm News Jan 13, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Expands Washington, D.C. Office with Addition of David Short Sequor Law expands its Washington, D.C. office with the addition of David Short, strengthening its cross-border litigation, asset recovery. Firm News Jan 12, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Expands Asset Recovery Practice With the Addition of Attorneys Michael Hanlon and Noah Rosenblum Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Michael Hanlon and Noah Rosenblum have joined the firm as attorneys further strengthening the firm’s. Attorney Spotlight Oct 9, 2025 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know David Short 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.

Sequor Law's Gregory Grossman speaks at OffshoreAlert's vGlobal 2021 Asset Recovery Day, a virtual conference on intelligence, investigations, and recovery in international finance. Offshore Alert vGlobal 2021 Conference Open Events & Speaking Open November 30, 2021 1 minute read Sequor Law December 6-10 A virtual conference on intelligence, investigations, & recovery for everyone in high-value international finance. Sequor Law’s Founding Shareholder, Gregory Grossman will be sfopeaking at OffshoreAlert’s vGlobal Asset Recovery Day on December 8th. Sequor Law Counsel, Daniel Coyle will be speaking at OffshoreAlert’s vGlobal Crypto Day on December 9th. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open 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. Firm News Jan 13, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Expands Washington, D.C. Office with Addition of David Short Sequor Law expands its Washington, D.C. office with the addition of David Short, strengthening its cross-border litigation, asset recovery. Firm News Jan 12, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Expands Asset Recovery Practice With the Addition of Attorneys Michael Hanlon and Noah Rosenblum Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Michael Hanlon and Noah Rosenblum have joined the firm as attorneys further strengthening the firm’s. Attorney Spotlight Oct 9, 2025 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know David Short 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.

A forum article examining how managers and allies can better support underrepresented attorneys in law firms, featuring insights from Sequor Law's Gregory Grossman. Forum: The critical role of managers and allies in the legal profession Open In the News Open June 23, 2021 4 minutes read Sequor Law In the corporate world, managers of diverse employees have significant influence over their employees’ success and play a major role in retaining and developing those employees. While the same is true in the legal industry, it is harder to determine who is the diverse attorney’s manager. Most associates work with a variety of partners, even at smaller law firms, so it is more difficult to say which partner wears the label of “manager.” Unfortunately, this often means that it becomes less clear who is responsible for developing, supporting and promoting diverse attorneys. However, it is the underrepresented – people of color, women, LGBTQ+ persons, individuals with disabilities and veterans – who need effective advocates in the workplace beyond their manager. And these advocates are the courageous allies in society that work to create more equitable and inclusive experiences and workplaces. All law firms have their own distinct structure, and this structure determines who is responsible for guiding a diverse associate on their path to success. Obviously, the partner who assigns work should be the first advocate for the attorney’s career. Second, practice area leaders (or similar positions) may not interact with diverse attorneys regularly but are responsible for the overall success of all the attorneys under their purview. In some cases, firms also have a person in an administrative role who oversees work assignments, evaluations and feedback – another good candidate to be an advocate. And finally, formal and informal mentors play a role. In the legal world, all the above-mentioned leaders should act as “manager” in an effort to positively impact diverse associates’ career trajectories and enhance the firm’s retention. Issues arise, however, when none, or only one, of these people step up and accept the responsibility. Ensuring that diverse attorneys have access to formalized work assignments, professional development opportunities, mentoring programs and sponsorship commitments does not happen without a concerted effort. Firm leaders should focus on these four areas to make sure advocacy happens within the firm: Building relationships Wesley Bizzell, senior assistant general counsel of Altria Client Services and president of the National LGBT Bar Association, notes that “time is a challenge,” whether in a corporate law department or a law firm, but that “plain old-fashioned listening” is vital to a manager’s role in supporting diverse attorneys. Creating relationships with diverse attorneys shows the manager is making an investment in attorney careers. The key is to create a “sincere relationship with people because it will pay off in the long term,” says Ronald Jordan, senior principal director at Carter-White & Shaw. “It is an investment.” Providing opportunities It is critical for diverse attorney success that managers be conscious of how and to whom they assign work and the quality of those assignments. “It’s important to be thoughtful about high-profile work across the team,” explains Bonnie Lau, partner at Morrison & Foerster and alumni chair of the Leadership Council on Legal Diversity. “It is common knowledge that partners tend to rely on their choice colleagues, which often excludes underrepresented diverse attorneys.” Ensuring a pipeline of work Developing key legal competencies is vital for all attorneys, and work assignments are the primary mechanism in how attorneys gain that skill and knowledge. No matter who controls the pipeline, “just getting diverse attorneys noticed and valued so that they gain access is what is important,” says Gregory Grossman , partner at Sequor Law. Managers, however defined in a law firm, need to ensure their diverse attorneys get the experience necessary to stay on track at their firms, and there are many ways managers can do this. For example, to ensure the firm’s work was equitably distributed, Jenner & Block piloted a new work assignment process to create “more oversight and insight starting with the new associates,” notes Courtney Carter, Jenner & Block’s director of diversity and inclusion. Promoting allyship An ally is an individual who helps to create work cultures that attract and retain the highest quality attorneys. These allies commit to diversity, equity and inclusion in meaningful and lasting ways to best support the advancement of underrepresented attorneys. An ally also must demonstrate courage and agree to risk their political capital for underrepresented attorneys. This includes “offering to introduce colleagues from underrepresented groups to influential people within your network,” says Keyonn Pope, partner at Reed Smith. Being an ally What does it mean to be an ally within a legal organization? Senior attorneys who hold positions of influence often act as allies to those with less access, taking responsibility for implementing changes that will enable underrepresented attorneys’ success. “Being an ally, or accomplice, requires a commitment to use one’s personal and professional platform to create positive change,” says Daniel L. (D.L.) Morriss, diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) partner at Hinshaw & Culbertson. Indeed, an ally can perform powerful acts such as recommending newer colleagues for high-profile work, stretch assignments and learning opportunities. Allies can also demonstrate support by creating a safe space for attorneys to be their authentic selves, normalizing mental health and wellness issues, and suggesting diverse attorneys to be speakers or panelists. “There are people who support DEI and want to be allies,” explains Taylor Wilson, managing partner of Haynes and Boone, adding it’s important to “empower them to use their voices and privilege to better advocate for change.” Allies also seek to create systemic change within the organization, not just remove barriers for specific underrepresented attorneys. This can be done through resource funding, salary review, inclusive hiring practices, inclusive employee benefit plans, nursing rooms, wellness rooms, prayer rooms, venue accessibility and all-gender restrooms. Ultimately, allies must give honest and constructive feedback and overcome fears that the receiver will not accept the feedback. Studies have found that African American lawyers receive extra scrutiny from supervising attorneys, which can lead to poor performance reviews, lower bonuses, less visible assignments and job loss. The feedback should be specific. When pinpointing something negative, offer assistance and highlight ways and resources to improve. The key is to tie all feedback to business goals. In the legal field, diversity of thought and perspective are critical to servicing clients at the highest level. Managers and allies will help law firms move the needle forward in creating an environment in which all underrepresented communities are afforded equal access to quality work and opportunities. Remember, the ultimate goal of a diverse workforce is to promote a stronger cross section of perspectives, experiences and insights to solve clients’ legal challenges. This should be the goal of every attorney and law firm leader. To see 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 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. Firm News Jan 13, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Expands Washington, D.C. Office with Addition of David Short Sequor Law expands its Washington, D.C. office with the addition of David Short, strengthening its cross-border litigation, asset recovery. Firm News Jan 12, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Expands Asset Recovery Practice With the Addition of Attorneys Michael Hanlon and Noah Rosenblum Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Michael Hanlon and Noah Rosenblum have joined the firm as attorneys further strengthening the firm’s. Attorney Spotlight Oct 9, 2025 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know David Short 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.

Arnoldo B. Lacayo discusses international financial fraud, cross-border asset recovery, and crypto-related fraud in his WWL Thought Leader Global Elite Q&A. WWL Thought Leader Global Elite - Arnoldo B. Lacayo Q&A Open Awards & Recognition Open August 25, 2022 2 minutes read Sequor Law Navigating the evolving landscape of international financial fraud and asset recovery demands not only legal expertise, but a deep understanding of how fraudsters think and where they hide assets. In his ThoughtLeaders interview, Sequor Law Shareholder Arnoldo B. Lacayo offers a candid, experience-driven look at the challenges and strategic considerations that shape modern cross-border asset recovery work. Lacayo, whose practice focuses on financial fraud , asset recovery and cross-border insolvency , frames asset recovery as a discipline defined by its complexity and the ingenuity of adversaries. He explains that one of the greatest hurdles in this space is the boundless creativity of fraudsters and the sophisticated networks — including legal allies and financial professionals — they can deploy to shield assets and frustrate efforts by victims and creditors. A significant portion of the discussion centers on the global dimension of these disputes, particularly the flow of capital from regions like South America into the United States. Lacayo notes that political and economic pressures abroad often push disputed assets into U.S. jurisdictions , creating frequent and complex cross-border issues for litigants and counsel alike. The article also addresses how Sequor Law stays ahead of emerging trends, including crypto-related fraud . Lacayo emphasizes that the firm’s investigative and discovery strategies are constantly evolving as new technologies mature, even as crypto fraud continues to pose unique challenges. Lacayo reflects on some of the most intricate matters he has handled, from the Stanford International Bank Ponzi case to the largest bank failure in Brazilian history — each illustrating the multifaceted nature of asset concealment and recovery . His insights reinforce the importance of flexibility, innovation, and thorough preparation in formulating legal strategies across jurisdictions . Looking ahead, Lacayo stresses that staying “one step ahead” of those who conceal assets will require both legal innovation and judicial receptivity to new methods of discovery and relief. He also offers practical advice to aspiring asset recovery lawyers, underscoring the value of specialization, professional networking, and continual professional development in this demanding area of practice. For a deeper dive into Lacayo’s perspectives and professional experiences, we invite you to read the full interview in the PDF below. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open 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. Firm News Jan 13, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Expands Washington, D.C. Office with Addition of David Short Sequor Law expands its Washington, D.C. office with the addition of David Short, strengthening its cross-border litigation, asset recovery. Firm News Jan 12, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Expands Asset Recovery Practice With the Addition of Attorneys Michael Hanlon and Noah Rosenblum Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Michael Hanlon and Noah Rosenblum have joined the firm as attorneys further strengthening the firm’s. Attorney Spotlight Oct 9, 2025 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know David Short 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.