Search this site

A Florida federal judge remands Turkish businessmen's attempt to block a $388M arbitral award back to state court, finding their removal to federal court was untimely. Turkish Brothers’ $388M Award Fight Sent Back To State Court Open In the News Open February 11, 2020 3 minutes read Sequor Law By Kelly Zegers Law360 (February 11, 2020, 7:37 PM EST) — A Florida federal judge has let a Turkish company go back to state court as it seeks to enforce a $338 million arbitral award, finding that two Turkish businessmen’s removal to federal court last year was untimely. U.S. District Judge Rodney Smith said brothers Mustafa and Sefa Çevik’s time-barred removal of the case was an attempt to seek a different ruling after a Florida state court confirmed the arbitral award that stemmed from a soured chromium ore mining license deal with the company, Turchrome Krom Madencili Sanay Ve Dis Ticaret Ltd. Sirketi Turkey. In determining the Çevik brothers’ removal was untimely and granting the company’s motion to remand, the judge applied a previous court’s ruling on an international arbitral awards convention that found a party couldn’t willingly proceed with discovery and trial in state court only to remove “when the first bite of what appears to be a ripe apple turns extremely sour.” In this case, the brothers were trying to take a “second bite at the apple,” Judge Smith said. “It could not be clearer from defendants’ motions filed in the instant case that this is exactly what defendants are trying to do; after receiving an adverse ruling from the state court when the state court confirmed the arbitral award, defendants are now trying to obtain a different ruling in this court — first through removal and then through their motions to dismiss,” the judge said. The award in question had been issued to Turchrome in arbitration against Mustafa Çevik, which Turchrome initiated after yields at chromium ore sites failed to meet expectations. The arbitration took place in Paris under the auspices of the International Chamber of Commerce. The suit, which accuses Mustafa Çevik of fraudulently transferring certain real estate to Sefa in an effort to avoid paying the award, claims the two brothers have numerous assets in South Florida that could be used to enforce the award, including real estate, at least one business, and a Mercedes and a Range Rover. The federal judge’s ruling was in step with Turchrome’s contention that the Turkish businessmen failed to remove the case because the convention’s phrase “before the trial thereof” meant that trial begins when both sides present an argument on an issue of law or fact, according to court documents. The brothers called that interpretation “aggressive,” arguing that removal is timely as long as it happens before the state court has adjudicated on the merits of all of a plaintiff’s claims or dismissed the entire suit, the judge said. The judge acknowledged the businessmen’s reading of the existing case law on “before the trial” wasn’t unreasonable because there’s not a lot of case law on it. The Florida state court confirmed the arbitral award in May last year, according to court records. The brothers had moved to dismiss Turchrome’s motion to confirm the award. “The unfavorable ruling was not on just any claim; it was on the l[i]nchpin claim because the fraudulent transfer claims are dependent on confirmation of the arbitral award,” the judge said. Because of his finding on the timeliness issue, the federal judge said the court wouldn’t address Turchrome’s waiver argument. Turchrome had asserted the businessmen waived their rights to remove by litigating the case in state court before removal. The judge denied Turchrome’s motion for costs, according to the order. Representatives for the parties did not immediately respond to requests for comment Tuesday. Turchrome Krom Madencili Sanay Ve Dis Ticaret Ltd. Sirketi Turkey is represented in state court by Leyza B. Florin , Bruno de Camargo and Edward H. Davis Jr . of Sequor Law PA and Matthew D. McGill of Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP. Mustafa Çevik, Sefa Çevik and Charisma Marble LLC are represented by Aliette D. Rodz and Kristin Drecktrah Paz of Shutts & Bowen LLP. The case was Turchrome Krom Madencili Sanay Ve Dis Ticaret Ltd. Sirketi Turkey v. Cevik et al., case number 1:19-cv-22910, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. To view the original article, click here. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight Aug 17, 2026 3 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Carolina M. Rosso “Pour faire de grandes choses, il ne faut pas être un si grand génie... Firm News Jun 23, 2026 3 minutes Sequor Law Welcomes Attorney Carolina M. Rosso to Its Expanding International Litigation and Asset Recovery Team Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Carolina M. Rosso has joined the firm as an Attorney. Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more..

Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Robert B. Kearney Open Attorney Spotlight Open December 3, 2024 3 minutes read Sequor Law 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? My dad was a small-town doctor. It was really important to him to help people in his community to—literally—get back on their feet. His role as a healer was more than a vocation to him; it was his identity and his calling. When I was in middle school, he was wrongfully forced out of the clinic he had helped build. The excuse the clinic provided was that he could no longer provide adequate care. Although the termination itself was certainly alarming, he was completely heartbroken by the insinuation that he ever provided anything other than the highest standard of care. That insinuation tarnished his very understanding of himself, I think. It truly changed him for a long time. Eventually, he filed a lawsuit against his former clinic and, when I was in college, he won, receiving some backpay for the wrongful termination. What mattered most to him, however, was that a jury of his peers had sat down and certified, after weeks of testimony, that his termination had nothing to do with his ability to heal. It really gave him back to us, in a lot of ways. I think that was the first time I really appreciated that the ability of the law to make someone whole is something more than an arithmetic exercise in compensation. Until then, I had primarily been looking at a career in consulting or finance, but that experience really drew me to the law. 2. Why did you choose the areas of law that you practice? It goes without saying that the ethos of this practice area is in line with what initially drew me to the law. Beyond that, however, I thrive on complexity. I truly enjoy unraveling and solving a difficult problem with a lot of variables, and I think that’s part of what drew me to insolvency and asset recovery. For example, I chose my bankruptcy clerkship over a district court offer because I had been tracking developments in the law and was fascinated by its breadth and the tools it offered. 3. What skills do you draw upon when it comes to your specific practice areas? Several past employers have commented on my ability to work through immense amounts of information relatively quickly and synthesize it into a story. I think that’s my primary skill and the one that I’ve found most useful here. It works for legal aspects of this practice area, as well as the complex factual situations we often encounter. 4. What is the most rewarding part about your job? So far, it’s the fact that I get to go to sleep every night knowing that I’m helping people be made whole. They say the arc of the universe bends towards justice; it’s nice to imagine I’m putting my own tiny amount of force into pushing that arc in the right direction. 5. Tell us about a mentor who made an impact on your career. I had several professors in law school that encouraged me to pursue what I was interested in, beyond the standard law school path. I also had two outstanding judges, Judge Erik Atas in the Maryland Circuit Court for Baltimore City and Judge James Tancredi in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut, that pushed me to think creatively, learn to be better every day, and gave me incredible advice on so much more than my legal career. It feels like an injustice to name only one. 6. If you weren’t practicing law, what would you be doing? Probably working in consulting. That was my original path, but I’m not sure how much my heart was really in it. I prefer to imagine I’d be a history professor, but I don’t think I would have actually gone that route. 7. What might people be surprised to learn about you? I am a huge outdoorsman. I used to be a certified Wilderness First Responder and lifeguard, but I let those lapse a few years ago. It feels very surreal, I’m sure, to imagine anyone you have met in a suit standing up to their knees in a bog with a canoe on their back in the Canadian wilderness. 8. What is a good book or article you read recently? My favorite book I’ve read in the last few years is probably “The Last Stand of the Tin Can Soldiers” by James D. Hornfischer, which is a fantastic book for World War II history buffs. I’m currently reading “Chip War” by Chris Miller, which is a captivating narrative of the growth of semiconductors and their importance to geopolitics. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight Aug 17, 2026 3 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Carolina M. Rosso “Pour faire de grandes choses, il ne faut pas être un si grand génie... Firm News Jun 23, 2026 3 minutes Sequor Law Welcomes Attorney Carolina M. Rosso to Its Expanding International Litigation and Asset Recovery Team Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Carolina M. Rosso has joined the firm as an Attorney. Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more..

Latinvex named Sequor Law founding shareholder Edward H. Davis Jr. among Latin America’s Top 100 Lawyers of 2018, recognizing his litigation and fraud experience. Sequor Attorneys chosen in Latinvex Latin America’s Top 100 Lawyers Open Awards & Recognition Open February 16, 2018 1 minute read Sequor Law Latinvex recognizes the top foreign lawyers in Latin America Edward H. Davis, Jr. was named among Latin America’s Top 100 Lawyers of 2018 by Latinvex. Those honored were evaluated on criteria such as recent track record on major deals and business, prominence of firm in Latin America, and rankings by third parties such as Chambers and Partners, Legal 500 and Thomson Reuters. Davis received the distinction for his stellar work and extensive experience in the litigation and fraud areas. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight Aug 17, 2026 3 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Carolina M. Rosso “Pour faire de grandes choses, il ne faut pas être un si grand génie... Firm News Jun 23, 2026 3 minutes Sequor Law Welcomes Attorney Carolina M. Rosso to Its Expanding International Litigation and Asset Recovery Team Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Carolina M. Rosso has joined the firm as an Attorney. Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more..

Sequor Law's Edward H. Davis Jr. joined ICC FraudNet leaders at the ThoughtLeaders4 FIRE International conference in Vilamoura, Portugal on May 19, 2022. Thought Leaders 4 Fire: FIRE International Vilamoura, Portugal May 19, 2022 Open Events & Speaking Open May 19, 2022 1 minute read Sequor Law Incoming ICC FraudNet Co-Executive Director Rodrigo Callejas with Strategic Partner James Pomeroy and former Executive Director Edward H. Davis in Cyprus for the FraudNet Spring meeting. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight Aug 17, 2026 3 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Carolina M. Rosso “Pour faire de grandes choses, il ne faut pas être un si grand génie... Firm News Jun 23, 2026 3 minutes Sequor Law Welcomes Attorney Carolina M. Rosso to Its Expanding International Litigation and Asset Recovery Team Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Carolina M. Rosso has joined the firm as an Attorney. Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more..

IWIRC announces its 2019 founders award winners, including Sequor Law's Leyza B. Florin in Miami, recognizing outstanding women in the insolvency and restructuring industry across three global cities. IWIRC announces 2019 founders award winners Open Awards & Recognition Open June 14, 2019 1 minute read Sequor Law By Benjamin Clarke Award winners: Leyza B. Florin, Eloise Fardon and IWIRC’s London network co-chair Sonya Van de Graaff The International Women’s Insolvency & Restructuring Confederation (IWIRC) has announced the recipients of its 2019 founders awards, with winners in Miami, Hong Kong and London. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight Aug 17, 2026 3 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Carolina M. Rosso “Pour faire de grandes choses, il ne faut pas être un si grand génie... Firm News Jun 23, 2026 3 minutes Sequor Law Welcomes Attorney Carolina M. Rosso to Its Expanding International Litigation and Asset Recovery Team Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Carolina M. Rosso has joined the firm as an Attorney. Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more..

Sequor Law Attorney Maria Jose Cortesi authors "Navigating the Extraterritorial Tightrope in the Bankruptcy Code" for the American Bankruptcy Trustee Journal, Vol. 40, Issue 02. Navigating the Extraterritorial Tightrope in the Bankruptcy Code Open Legal Insights Open October 22, 2024 1 minute read Sequor Law Read the insightful article Maria Jose Cortesi contributed to the American Bankruptcy Trustee Journal on page 15, titled “Navigating the Extraterritorial Tightrope in the Bankruptcy Code.” This article was written for and originally appeared in Volume 40, Issue 02 of the American Bankruptcy Trustee Journal, a publication of the National Association of Bankruptcy Trustees (“NABT”), and is being reproduced with the consent of the NABT and the author. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight Aug 17, 2026 3 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Carolina M. Rosso “Pour faire de grandes choses, il ne faut pas être un si grand génie... Firm News Jun 23, 2026 3 minutes Sequor Law Welcomes Attorney Carolina M. Rosso to Its Expanding International Litigation and Asset Recovery Team Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Carolina M. Rosso has joined the firm as an Attorney. Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more..

Sequor Law's Leyza B. Florin represents joint liquidators of Gibraltar-registered Privilege Wealth One seeking Chapter 15 recognition in Miami amid fraud and mismanagement allegations. Gibraltarian payday loans business files Chapter 15 in Miami Open In the News Open August 15, 2018 4 minutes read Sequor Law Two weeks after its UK sister company filed for Chapter 15 protection in New Jersey, the joint liquidators of a Gibraltar-registered payday loans business embroiled in fraud and mismanagement allegations, have sought recognition of their appointment in Miami. With counsel from Sequor Law shareholder Leyza B. Florin , Grant Thornton partners David Ingram and Frederick White filed the Chapter 15 petition in the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida on 14 August. Ingram and White were appointed joint liquidators of Privilege Wealth One by the Supreme Court of Gibraltar in June, five months after administrators were appointed over its sister company, UK-registered holding company Privilege Wealth, in England. Soon after the UK administrators were appointed, the group caught the attention of the UK’s Mail on Sunday , which quoted a letter to investors from Privilege Wealth One blaming the group’s problems on a series of bad decisions, including the UK company;s investment in a payday loans business in South Dakota run by a Native American Sioux Tribe, and serviced – at least initially – from a call centre in Panama. The head of that call centre, according to the Mail, was a UK national and “well known scam operator” who was reportedly shot in an assassination attempt in Panama last year. He was later arrested at the request of Spanish police, which accused him of running a scam oil venture from a call centre in Marbella targeting British investors. In a declaration filed at the Miami court, Ingram said Privilege Wealth One was plunged into compulsory liquidation after Chilean creditor Richard Leclerc filed a statutory demand in Gibraltar in March. Leclerc requested payment owed to him by Privilege Wealth One and its general partner Privilege Wealth Management (PWM) under a loan note agreement. After the companies failed to satisfy the demand they were presumed insolvent under Gibraltarian law and Leclerc made an application to appoint the joint liquidators, supported by three additional investors. Those four creditors have combined unsatisfied debts of US$600,000 in US loan notes and £800,000 (US$1.02 million) in European loan notes. Ingram told the US court that he has taken steps to gather information on the affairs of Privilege Wealth One and PWM, and to notify all creditors and interested persons of his appointment. But he said that the information available to the joint liquidators so far has not allowed them determine “the precise details of the funds received from creditors” for investment in the Privilege companies, or how the proceeds were used. The Chapter 15 application “is of critical importance to addressing these issues”, Ingram’s declaration said. “[R]ecogonition under Chapter 15 is essential to the joint liquidators’ worldwide pursuit of assets with which to recover the funds received from creditors”. Under Gibraltarian insolvency law, no distinction is applied between the assets of an insolvent entity located within Gibraltar and those outside the territory. “The joint liquidators are empowered to seek recovery of all assets and rights, wherever located,” Ingram said, adding they are duty bound to pursue assets and claims of the debtor in the United States. Other actions GRR has already reported that the UK administrators Privilege Wealth, filed Chapter 15 recognition proceedings in New Jersey on 2 August. David Rubin & Partners’ Stephen Katz and John Kelmanson of Kelmanson Insolvency Solutions were appointed by the England and Wales High Court back in January, after the company defaulted on funds owed to the Gibraltarian entity. In a declaration filed in New Jersey, Katz said he had become aware that Privilege Wealth had possible rights and causes of action arising out of a 25,000 strong portfolio of payday loans. He said any outstanding loans and the proceeds from the portfolio may now lie with US company Oliphant Financial, which was allegedly engaged to service the loans after the UK company’s own Panamanian subsidiary stopped servicing them. Katz and Kelmanson intend to file lawsuits in the US to obtain what funds they can for creditors, and have also asked the New Jersey bankruptcy court’s permission to repatriate any proceeds recovered to the UK. Privilege Wealth One and Luxemburgish fund Helix Investment Management are described as the UK company’s two primary lenders in its Chapter 15 application. They appear on a list of entities against whom Katz and Kelmanson may seek provisional relief in the US, along with Florida foreign limited partnership Privilege Direct, and numerous Oliphant entities, which are being pursued by Helix in the District Court of the Middle District of Florida. Helix, which may be owed US$7 million by Privilege Wealth according to the UK’s Mail on Sunday , is seeking damages of US$75,000 plus interest and injunctive relief in those proceedings for the breach of various security arrangements relating to loans it issued to the company. In Ingram and White’s Chapter 15 petition in Miami, they also list the Oliphant groups and Helix as entities against whom the Gibraltarian company may seek interim relief, as well as the UK company Privilege Wealth. A hearing to decide Privilege Wealth One’s recognition application will take place before Judge Laurel Isicoff in Florida on 9 September. Meanwhile, a recognition hearing for Privilege Wealth’s action in New Jersey has been listed for 6 September, with Judge John Sherwood assigned to the case. In the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida In re: Privilege Wealth One Limited Partnership Judge Laurel Isicoff Joint Liquidators of Privilege Wealth One Grant Thornton Partners David Ingram in London and Frederick White in Gibraltar Counsel to the joint liquidators of Privilege Wealth One Sequor Law Partners Leyza B. Florin and Edward Davis in Miami 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 Aug 17, 2026 3 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Carolina M. Rosso “Pour faire de grandes choses, il ne faut pas être un si grand génie... Firm News Jun 23, 2026 3 minutes Sequor Law Welcomes Attorney Carolina M. Rosso to Its Expanding International Litigation and Asset Recovery Team Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Carolina M. Rosso has joined the firm as an Attorney. Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more..

Sequor Law Counsel Christopher A. Noel discusses asset recovery, art fraud, financial crime, and his practice in international commercial litigation in this attorney spotlight interview. ATTORNEY SPOTLIGHT: Christopher A. Noel Open Attorney Spotlight Open May 23, 2022 5 minutes read Sequor Law Sequor Law Counsel, Christopher A. Noel , shared his insights on Art Fraud in the legal industry on this month’s Attorney Spotlight. Asset recovery, corruption and proceeds of crime recovery, financial fraud, and international commercial litigation and appeals. My practice involves representing clients ranging from sovereign governments and multinational corporations to court-appointed fiduciaries and private clients. The role of an asset recovery lawyer is to be a member of a multi-faceted team focused on a core objective: recovering value for the client. Often, asset recovery counsel assembles teams of investigators and forensic experts to more fully understand the circumstances that gave rise to the dispute, and asset recovery counsel serves as a hub for all of the professionals working to advance the client’s objectives. Art fraud takes many forms – it can be based on a forged or otherwise inauthentic artwork, or as we see more commonly, it can be financial fraud perpetrated through abuse of the otherwise very private art market. As the global art market grows, and new consumers are brought into the market, the risk of art fraud increases. Without disclosing privileged details, I have had an opportunity to work with our team at Sequor on a variety of interesting matters. The assets have ranged from NFTs and blue-chip artworks to monies held by state sponsors of terrorism and kleptocrats. Our work is truly global. Since joining Sequor, I have worked on matters touching North America, South America, the Caribbean, the UK, Europe, the Middle East, and Asia. Motivation for fraud, and crime in general, is usually a case-specific matter. However, two key factors impacting fraud in the art market are: (a) the relatively high level of privacy afforded in fine art and luxury goods sales (private dealers and auction houses typically dislike disclosure of client and sale information); and (b) the relative ease of transporting art and other luxury goods across borders without declaration to customs officials. Because transactions are often conducted in private and the goods are easily transported, art fraud is a growing market for fraudsters around the world. Art fraud has a direct impact on all consumers of art. When specific artworks are involved in litigation (because of fraud or otherwise), they are often stored pending resolution of the proceedings. This means that the art-consuming public will likely not have the opportunity to view the artwork until the dispute resolves. Additionally, fraud in any market increases transaction costs – leading to increased consumer costs either at galleries, art fairs or even when visiting museums. Asset recovery is a critical aspect of the law. The field of asset recovery covers a broad range of legal efforts, but it focuses on returning value to the client, who otherwise may not recover. A money judgment has limited value, but the post-judgment recovery is where a victim of fraud actually becomes close to whole again. As with any other type of financial fraud, there are market conditions that lend themselves to increases in fraudulent activity. The most clear example of this is whenever there is a spike in fine art sales, which may lead to increased art fraud within the market. Otherwise, spikes may also arise when dealing with inauthentic works, whereby a forger releases a tranche of works at once, often purporting that they came from a single previously-unknown collector. Art fraud follows the same form as many other frauds that Sequor sees on a daily basis. The team at Sequor, however, is specially suited to handle art fraud cases because of our extensive history of successfully recovering artworks in fraud cases, as well as our relationships with the international art industry. Art fraud, as is the case with most fraud matters, is a deeply personal wrong against a person or entity. Behind the scenes, Sequor acts as counselor and advisor to clients who are, in many instances, experiencing fraud firsthand for the first time. Sequor’s ability to match world-class legal practice with a hands-on and compassionate client relationship sets us apart in the market. International asset recovery and fraud litigation is an extremely interesting and dynamic field. Anyone interested in going into this area of the law should make best efforts to both master their understanding of the US legal system while also gathering an understanding of international legal systems and politics. It is truly a rare occasion where one of our cases does not involve facts and claims in multiple countries on multiple continents. Persistence and professionalism. Persistence is key because a common defense strategy is to lay in wait for the prosecuting attorney to make the first move. Without persistence, our clients may not recover the value they lost, or they may unnecessarily wait for a recovery, thereby allowing their opponent time to hide or shield assets subject to recovery. Professionalism is also a key aspect of our practice. Dealing with professionals and clients around the world requires a highly professional and adaptive demeanor. Additionally, professionalism is an aspect of the legal practice that is often the first thing lost in stressful and tense situations. The adage that one catches more flies with honey than with vinegar is a good rule to practice by. I studied law for two reasons. First, I appreciate the logic that the law provides. Decisions in the common law system are largely based on prior precedent that builds upon past cases and creates a body of law from which lawyers can pull based on the individual facts of each case. Additionally, the feeling of helping victims is second to none. Sequor prides itself on only representing those who have lost out at the hands of others’ wrongdoing. It is a great feeling to go to sleep at night knowing that I am trying to do good every day. The most significant aspect of being a lawyer today is the fast-evolving nature of our practice. During the COVID-19 pandemic, courts and law firms were required to quickly adjust to a remote world or else they faced dire outcomes for pending and new cases. While the law is typically a slow-to-evolve profession, the past few years have finally launched the practice into the new millennium. These advances in technology also assist practice in general – Zoom has made it easier to communicate with clients and colleagues around the world, and advances in artificial intelligence have made analyzing huge sets of data more efficient both in terms of time and cost. I look forward to seeing how technology further impacts the practice in the coming years as everyone re-adjusts to a (hopefully) post-COVID world. There are three pieces of advice that I would give younger attorneys today. First, make sure that you are a master of procedure if you are a litigator. The party who better knows the rules of procedure is at an extreme advantage over his adversary. Second, strive to get as much hands-on experience as possible. Seek out opportunities to shadow more senior lawyers, volunteer to take depositions and argue at motion calendar, and if possible, work on a trial as early as possible. Finally, explore the various areas of practice. It is uncommon now for a lawyer to remain in one area of practice for their entire career – if you do not feel rewarded in one practice, explore others until you find something that excites you every day. Sequor is unlike any law firm I’ve ever worked with. Our team is like a family and our boutique size allows us to cross-collaborate on many matters, leading to more creative and well-rounded solutions for our clients. Sequor also focuses on attorney development to a degree that I am unaware of at any other firm. Young attorneys are encouraged to follow their passions within the firm’s general practice areas, and they are encouraged to write, speak, and network in ways that meaningfully grow a young attorney’s practice at an accelerated yet manageable rate. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight Aug 17, 2026 3 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Carolina M. Rosso “Pour faire de grandes choses, il ne faut pas être un si grand génie... Firm News Jun 23, 2026 3 minutes Sequor Law Welcomes Attorney Carolina M. Rosso to Its Expanding International Litigation and Asset Recovery Team Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Carolina M. Rosso has joined the firm as an Attorney. Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more..

Sequor Law's Leyza B. Florin and Daniel Coyle analyze the emerging minority view on delivering subpoenas under FRCP Rule 45(b)(1) and its impact on cross-border asset recovery. Asset recovery column: emerging minority view on delivery of subpoenas under FRCP 45 Open Legal Insights Open March 25, 2020 5 minutes read Sequor Law Sequor Law shareholder Leyza B. Florin and attorney Daniel Coyle in Miami discuss the emerging trend in US federal and bankruptcy courts regarding service of subpoenas under rule 45(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP). The language of rule 45(b) establishes the method for serving a subpoena upon the subpoena target. Previously, despite differences in the text between rule 45(b) and rule 4, governing service of original process, courts required subpoenas to be served on the subpoena target exclusively by hand delivery under the methods specified in rule 4. However, rule 45(b) jurisprudence is evolving to a more liberal standard that is both more in line with the text of rule 45(b) and more advantageous to the asset recovery practitioner, and client, seeking third-party discovery – especially from discovery targets in cross-border cases who maintain multiple residences or a more transient presence in the United States. Service of a subpoena versus service of process— what is the difference and why is there a difference? First and foremost, service of a subpoena under rule 45 is accomplished by “delivery”, and specifically, “delivering a copy [of the subpoena] to the named person”. Juxtapose this language with the text of rule 4, specifically subsections “e” and “f” specifying the method for service of process of natural persons, which is also applicable for service of process of artificial persons, in and outside of the US and it is clear that the standards are notably different. Noticeably absent from the text of rule 45 are the words “personally”; “hand” delivery; or “abode” service. References to rule 4, and state rules of service of process are also missing. Thus, based upon a plain meaning of the rules, the method of service of a subpoena is not the same as service of process. In the bankruptcy context, construing rule 45 to require personal service or even abode service of a subpoena leads to an even more bizarre result since, under rule 7004(b), service of process of an adversary proceeding may be validly accomplished by first class mail. The distinction between the method of service of a subpoena and service of process was crucial to Judge A. Jay Cristol’s reasoned opinion in the 2008 case of Falcon is not the only case to analyze the distinctions between rule 45(b) and rule (4), but it provides an insightful exposition of several cases from various courts as well as an insightful analysis of the language of both rules to explain why the method of accomplishing service under each rule is different. Judge Cristol analysed several judicial decisions from both inside and outside Florida, each of which determined that the service of a subpoena upon the recipient by a means other than personal service was valid. Moving to a statutory construction analysis, Judge Cristol determined that the term “delivering” was ambiguous and should be considered in the context of other parts of rule 45, “as well as other federal rules.” Judge Cristol stated that a reading of rule 45(b)(1) as requiring the subpoena to be personally served, would render the language of rule 45(b)(4) regarding the “manner of service”, and the language of rule 4(e)(2)(A) and 4(f)(2)(C)(i) requiring the process be delivered “personally”, as “superfluous” and “pure surplusage.” Construing rule 45(b) to require personal service would thus run afoul of the Surplusage Canon (). Dubbing this approach the “better-reasoned, modern, emerging minority position,” Judge Cristol applied it to the facts of the case before him. Other factors are also germane to determining that service is valid. The public policy underlying the service requirement is ensuring the receipt of the subpoena so that the subpoena target has notice of both the subpoena, and what is required/requested from the subpoena target. Thus, the purpose of the service requirement is actual receipt, which the courts accord significant weight to. Courts also focus on equitable considerations when determining validity, such as attempts by subpoena targets to subvert the purpose of the rules by hyper-technically construing them as an artifice to evade service. For instance, in the 2000 case of , the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York found rule 45 allows for service of a subpoena by certified mail on a deponent who rebuffed attempts at personal service and whose doorman restricted a process server’s access to a deponent’s apartment. What is “delivery” and what constitutes “delivery” under the emerging minority position? Delivery under this approach was defined in as serving the subpoena in a manner that reasonably insures actual receipt of the subpoena by the witness. Some courts, adopting the emerging minority position, have fleshed out this standard by providing that service may be accomplished by mailing the subpoena to the subpoena target’s known address in the US or abroad. Other courts have established that sending the subpoena by common carrier is sufficient. In the case, the court determined that substitute service on another member of the household constitutes valid service, even though the subpoena target did not reside at the address where the subpoena was delivered. At least one court has ruled that delivering the subpoena to the subpoena target’s agent is sufficient, and other courts have upheld service on domestic workers. Indeed, in a recent ruling in the case of in the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida, Judge Robert Mark held that service of the subpoena by delivering it to a non-resident domestic worker at the address where the subpoena target’s family lived was sufficient. The emerging minority position should continue to gain adherents and traction The so-called emerging minority position is consistent with the text of rule 45(b) and consistent with the canons of statutory construction. It is also consistent with the policy aims of the service rule: ensuring actual receipt. The emerging minority position also establishes a more liberal standard that serves another laudable public policy goal: easing the discovery of information that will increase the likelihood of recovering assets while simultaneously discouraging the corruption of the rules of civil procedure by swindlers as a ruse to avoid valid service and valid discovery. The advantage of this more liberal standard for the asset-recovery attorney seeking discovery from discovery-targets in cross-border cases is clear. A lower threshold for effecting service eases the burden of attempting to serve discovery-targets who maintain a presence both inside and outside of the United States and lowers the likelihood of having to pursue discovery in foreign jurisdictions under the slow and cumbersome procedures of the Hague Convention or through a letter rogatory in a non-member state. References Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, rule 45(b) Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, rule 4 To view the original article, click here. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight Aug 17, 2026 3 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Carolina M. Rosso “Pour faire de grandes choses, il ne faut pas être un si grand génie... Firm News Jun 23, 2026 3 minutes Sequor Law Welcomes Attorney Carolina M. Rosso to Its Expanding International Litigation and Asset Recovery Team Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Carolina M. Rosso has joined the firm as an Attorney. Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more..

Sequor Law obtains a U.S. court order compelling Citibank to comply with financial discovery under the FSIA to enforce a judgment against the Republic of Kazakhstan, a key asset recovery win. U.S. Court Orders Citibank to Comply with Financial Discovery in Kazakhstan Judgment Enforcement Open Case Results Open February 21, 2025 1 minute read Sequor Law In a recent ruling that is of particular interest to parties seeking financial discovery relating to foreign sovereigns, Sequor Law, acting as part of a global enforcement team along with Astraea Group Ltd and Hillmont Partners, sought and obtained an Opinion and Order in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York compelling Citibank N.A. and various affiliated entities (together, “Citi”) to respond to financial discovery in furtherance of Petitioners’ efforts to enforce their judgment against the Republic of Kazakhstan. A copy of the Court’s Opinion and Order, which reaffirmed various core principles governing the rights of creditors to obtain discovery under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (the “FSIA”), can be accessed below. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight Aug 17, 2026 3 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Carolina M. Rosso “Pour faire de grandes choses, il ne faut pas être un si grand génie... Firm News Jun 23, 2026 3 minutes Sequor Law Welcomes Attorney Carolina M. Rosso to Its Expanding International Litigation and Asset Recovery Team Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Carolina M. Rosso has joined the firm as an Attorney. Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more..

On National Pet Day 2026, Sequor Law continues its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami nonprofit rescuing, rehabilitating, and rehoming dogs in South Florida. Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue Open Firm News Open April 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Miami – April 11, 2026 – In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit organization dedicated to rescuing, rehabilitating, and rehoming abandoned and at-risk dogs. As part of this year’s initiative, Sequor Law has made a charitable donation to support Paws4You’s ongoing efforts to provide care, shelter, and medical attention to dogs in need, while helping them transition into safe and permanent homes. Assistant Director of Marketing and Communications Gabriella Barros visited the Paws4You shelter to personally connect with the organization’s leadership and witness its impact firsthand. During her visit, she met with Founder and Executive Director Carol Caridad and team member Mirta Segredo, and spent time with more than 50 dogs currently under the organization’s care. Paws4You Rescue plays a vital role in South Florida’s animal welfare community, relying on a network of volunteers, fosters, and supporters to advance its mission. Through rescue operations, rehabilitation, and adoption efforts, the organization continues to create meaningful outcomes for both animals and the families who welcome them home. As part of our broader community engagement, we also celebrate the role pets play within our firm through our https://www.sequorlaw.com/pets . , where we share the companions who brighten our team’s lives every day. From rescue stories to everyday moments, the page offers a more personal glimpse into our community. We invite you to explore, meet our pets, and share in the joy they bring—while reinforcing the importance of adoption and responsible pet ownership. “Supporting organizations like Paws4You reflects our commitment to making a meaningful impact beyond our legal practice,” said Gregory S. Grossman , Founding Shareholder of Sequor Law. “Their work embodies compassion, dedication, and community involvement, values that strongly align with our firm.” Sequor Law encourages members of the community to learn more about Paws4You and explore ways to get involved, whether through adoption, fostering, volunteering, or donations. Additional information is available at www.paws4you.org . This initiative is part of Sequor Law’s broader commitment to community engagement and philanthropic support, reinforcing the firm’s dedication to giving back in meaningful and lasting ways. For more information, visit: www.sequorlaw.com Headquartered in Miami and with an office in Washington, D.C., Sequor Law is an international law firm focusing on representing victims of financial fraud, including sovereign governments and state-owned enterprises, public and non-public companies, insolvency practitioners, and all manner of clients in the areas of asset recovery, financial fraud, cross-border insolvency, and international litigation and arbitration. www.sequorlaw.com PAWS4you Rescue, Inc. is a 501(c)3 non-profit, volunteer and donor-subsidized animal rescue organization based in Miami, Florida. Founded in 2007, we are a 100% no-kill shelter serving the community by rescuing abandoned and neglected animals, nurturing these animals back to health through love and state-of-the art care, and promoting healthy and enriching relationships between pet owners and their pets. PAWS4you visualizes a world where pets are safe from the threat of euthanasia and live fully in the comfort of loving homes, enhancing the lives of those around them. www.paws4you.org Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight Aug 17, 2026 3 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Carolina M. Rosso “Pour faire de grandes choses, il ne faut pas être un si grand génie... Firm News Jun 23, 2026 3 minutes Sequor Law Welcomes Attorney Carolina M. Rosso to Its Expanding International Litigation and Asset Recovery Team Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Carolina M. Rosso has joined the firm as an Attorney. Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more..

Sequor Law's Leyza B. Florin and Carolina Goncalves summarize UNCITRAL's Model Law on Recognition and Enforcement of Insolvency-Related Judgments and its role in cross-border cases. The UN’s latest attempt to assist international insolvency practitioners Open Legal Insights Open July 13, 2020 5 minutes read Sequor Law Miami-based Sequor Law shareholder Leyza B. Florin and attorney Carolina Goncalves summarise the UNCITRAL Working Group’s Model Law on the Recognition and Enforcement of Insolvency-Related Judgments. As the world’s economy becomes increasingly transnational, and debtors, their assets, and creditors are scattered across multiple jurisdictions, the need for consistency and efficiency in the cross-border administration of insolvency proceedings has become more pressing. Variations among legal systems have resulted in inconsistent, duplicative, time-consuming and costly efforts to recognise and enforce insolvency-related judgments in different jurisdictions, creating legal uncertainty and other complications in the administration of cross-border insolvency proceedings. The United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) attempted to foster international cooperation in the administration of cross-border insolvencies through its Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency (MLCBI), but there remained an ambiguity in the recognition and enforcement of judgments related to insolvency proceedings, especially where enforcement of the foreign judgment was inconsistent with local law. The Model Law As a result, in 2014, UNCITRAL gave a mandate to its Working Group V on Insolvency Law to develop a model law that specifically provides for the recognition and enforcement of insolvency-related judgments. The Working Group collaborated with UNCITRAL’s 60 member states and the representatives of 31 observer states and 34 inter-governmental and non-governmental organisations to develop the Model Law on Recognition and Enforcement of Insolvency-Related Judgments . On 2 July 2018, UNCITRAL adopted the Model Law, which is designed to address both the gap in international law regarding the cross-border recognition and enforcement of judgments that arise as a consequence of, or are materially associated with, insolvency proceedings; and the uncertainty in interpreting certain provisions of the MLCBI “in terms of providing the necessary authority for such recognition and enforcement as a form of relief available on recognition of a foreign insolvency proceeding.” How the Model Law works The Model Law seeks to address these issues through its primary characteristics: harmonisation and flexibility. It offers enacting states a “simple, straightforward and harmonised procedure for recognition and enforcement of insolvency-related judgments” while remaining flexible in its integration into each enacting state’s legal system. Importantly, the Model Law is intended to supplement the MLCBI, and in fact mirrors its provisions and definitions in many respects, as well as the existing legal frameworks of the enacting states. For example, as international insolvency practitioners, we know the terminology used in insolvency proceedings can vary by jurisdiction. Where a term or expression is likely to vary among enacting states, the Model Law offers more inclusive defined terms, such as “insolvency proceeding” (as opposed to liquidation, reorganisation or bankruptcy) and “insolvency representative” (rather than trustee, foreign representative, liquidator, judicial administrator etc). It also describes terms or expressions in brackets as placeholders for jurisdiction-specific information – like the name of the court, body, or authority designated to perform the specified function – allowing the enacting state’s legislators to use the term specific to that jurisdiction. Additionally, the Model Law offers optional provisions, such as one allowing the enacting state to refuse the recognition of an insolvency-related judgment when it originates from a state whose “insolvency proceeding” would not be subject to recognition under the MLCBI. The Model Law also contains two noteworthy exceptions to recognising and enforcing insolvency-related judgments. Enacting states may refrain from taking any action that would be “manifestly contrary” to their public policy. Further, the Model Law enumerates the following specific grounds for the refusal of recognition and enforcement: improper notice to the defendant in the proceeding that gave rise to the insolvency-related judgment; the judgment was obtained by fraud; the judgment is inconsistent with a judgment entered in the enacting state involving the same parties; the judgment is consistent with an earlier judgment entered in another state involving the same parties and subject matter; recognition and enforcement would interfere with the administration of the debtor’s insolvency proceeding; the judgment materially affects the rights of creditors generally and their interests were not adequately protected in the proceeding that led to the judgment; and the court issuing the judgment did not have jurisdiction. Defining an “insolvency-related judgment” As its name suggests, the Model Law’s distinguishing feature is that it applies to “insolvency-related judgments”, which previously had not been fully addressed by other UNCITRAL insolvency texts. The Model Law provides a broad definition of “judgment” to include any decision, such as a decree, order, or determination of costs and expenses, “issued by a court or administrative authority”. To fall within the Model Law’s scope, an insolvency-related judgment must “arise… as a consequence of or [be] materially associated with an insolvency proceeding”, and be “issued on or after the commencement of that insolvency proceeding”. Importantly, the judgment must have been rendered in a proceeding in a state other than the enacting state in which recognition and enforcement are sought; the location of the insolvency proceedings to which the judgment relates is immaterial. The Model Law’s Guide to Enactment provides a non-exhaustive list of judgments that fall within the definition of “insolvency-related judgment”, including judgments dealing with the constitution and disposal of assets in the insolvency estate; judgments determining whether a transaction involving the debtors or assets of its insolvency estate should be avoided because it was a preferential transaction or a transaction at an undervalue; judgments involving a director or representative liability for the debtor’s actions while insolvent or in the period approaching insolvency; judgments determining that sums are owed to or by the debtor or the insolvency estate; judgments confirming or varying a plan of reorganization or liquidation or approving a voluntary or out-of-court restructuring agreement; and judgments for the examination of a director of the debtor, where that director is located in a third jurisdiction. Decisions or orders commencing insolvency proceedings and interim measures of protection are explicitly excluded from the Model Law’s scope. Further, it is unclear whether insolvency-related arbitral decisions are considered “insolvency-related judgments” under the Model Law, as they may not come from an “administrative authority.” The Model Law’s impact and success While it is still too early to evaluate the Model Law’s impact and success, its design as a supplement to the MLCBI and the enacting state’s existing legal structure, rather than an overhaul of existing insolvency frameworks, suggests that it will succeed (at least partially) in making the recognition and enforcement of insolvency-related judgments more consistent and efficient. Moreover, though the Model Law intends to respect the insolvency schemes of the respective enacting states, UNCITRAL cautions against excessively modifying the Model Law and frequently invoking its exceptions. That said, enacting states are still free to make the necessary modifications to protect their own legal processes and domestic creditors, which could result in the very complications the Model Law was intended to eliminate. The Model Law’s success also depends on the number of states that enact it. By way of comparison, over 45 jurisdictions have adopted the MLCBI, including Australia, Canada, Colombia, Japan, Kenya, Mexico, New Zealand, the Republic of Korea, Singapore, South Africa, the UK, BVI, Gibraltar, and the US; however, several European nations have not adopted it and are governed by the separate EU regulation (EC No. 1346/2000) on insolvency proceedings. This same EU regulation provides for the recognition and enforcement of judgments that “derive directly from and are closely linked to… insolvency proceedings”. Because this EU regulation seems to address the recognition and enforcement of insolvency-related judgments, and several European nations have opted to implement its framework and rejected the MLCBI, it is unlikely that these same nations will adopt the Model Law. Finally, as mentioned above, it is unclear whether insolvency-related arbitral decisions fall within the scope of the Model Law. As the law develops and the Working Group continues to issue guidance on its enactment, practitioners should expect to see developments on this issue. The Model Law and its accompanying Guide to Enactment are available here . Click here to read the original article . Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight Aug 17, 2026 3 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Carolina M. Rosso “Pour faire de grandes choses, il ne faut pas être un si grand génie... Firm News Jun 23, 2026 3 minutes Sequor Law Welcomes Attorney Carolina M. Rosso to Its Expanding International Litigation and Asset Recovery Team Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Carolina M. Rosso has joined the firm as an Attorney. Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more..