Search this site

Sequor Law's Christopher A. Noel examines fraud in the art market for Fraud Intelligence, exploring recent cases and legislative measures against art fraud and money laundering. Art for Fraud’s Sake – Fraud Intelligence Article by Christopher A. Noel Open Legal Insights Open August 2, 2022 1 minute read Sequor Law The glamorous, uber-wealthy, largely unregulated and opaque world of art dealing and collecting has intrinsic features that make it vulnerable to fraud. Christopher A Noel of Sequor Law sketches recent cases and legislative steps toward combating the problem. Andy Warhol is famously quoted as saying, “Art is what you can get away with.” Since the explosion of the contemporary art market during the past two decades, artists, collectors and fraudsters alike have embraced Warhol’s precarious perspective. The modern art market no longer exists in wood-panelled galleries lining the streets of London, Hong Kong and New York. Today’s collectors are mobile, purchasing artworks at all price points, sight unseen, during their commutes and while on holiday. These new business practices have had positive impact – UBS estimates that global art and antiquities sales in 2021 reached an estimated US$65.1 billion, surpassing even the peak sales figures seen in 2019. Click here to read the full article online. 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 Cristina Beard advise Grant Thornton trustees as an Omani businessman appeals a Florida court's recognition of his English bankruptcy proceedings. Omani businessman appeals US recognition of English bankruptcy Open In the News Open June 1, 2021 2 minutes read Sequor Law An Omani citizen is seeking to overturn a Florida court’s recognition of his English bankruptcy, which he describes as “a divorce case being played out on the international stage”. On 19 May in the US Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Florida, Talal Al Zawawi filed a notice of appeal against a recognition order granted to Grant Thornton’s Michael Leeds, Colin Diss and Hannah Davie as his bankruptcy trustees. Al Zawawi initially opted to have the appeal heard by a bankruptcy appellate panel, but it has since been transferred to the local district court. The grounds of appeal have yet to be published. Herron Hill Law Group shareholder Kenneth Herron is counsel to Al Zawawi on the appeal, while Sequor Law shareholder Leyza B. Florin and attorney Cristina Beard are advising the trustees. The bankruptcy court recognised the trustees on 6 May, six weeks after granting them interim recognition. The trustees sought recognition to block any party from transferring property owned by Al Zawawi, including any ownership interest he may hold in four Florida companies and a Texan company that does business in Florida, as well Omani businessman appeals US recognition of English bankruptcy as to obtain discovery powers to investigate his finances. Judge Lori Vaughan issued the recognition order despite an objection from Al Zawawi, who argued that he did not have any ownership interests in the five companies. “This case does not involve an international business entity or any other form of international intrigue,” Al Zawawi said in his objection. “It merely involves a divorce case being played out on the international stage.” Al Zawawi, a UK resident with Omani citizenship, has been subject to bankruptcy proceedings in England since June last year. His ex-wife had filed a bankruptcy petition against him over failure to pay a 2019 divorce decree, which required him to pay her £24 million (US$34.1 million). The businessman received a prison sentence a month after the decree was issued, due to his failure to comply with an order to disclose financial information to his ex-wife’s lawyers. His assets are currently subject to a worldwide freezing order. The trustees responded to Al Zawawi’s objection by claiming that he was a director of the Florida companies, that the companies owed US$94 million of assets between them and that he indirectly owned them through a Curaçao holding company, Qapa Investing Corporation. They have obtained a Curaçao attachment order against Qapa, which is coowned by the businessman and his six siblings. Since securing the recognition order, the trustees have filed notices of examination on the US branches of several banks, including Barclays, Citibank and Deutsche Bank, seeking documents relating to Al Zawawi’s financial affairs. Judge Gregory Presnell has been assigned to the appeal proceedings in the district court. He has yet to schedule a hearing. 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 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's Latin America's Top 100 Lawyers ranking features Sequor Law among the leading international law firms engaged in Latin American legal matters across 12 practice categories. Latin America’s Top 100 Lawyers Open Awards & Recognition Open June 23, 2021 2 minutes read Sequor Law Latinvex singles out the top foreign lawyers in Latin America. BY LATINVEX STAFF The editorial and research staff of Latinvex has selected the leading attorneys from international law firms that are involved in the legal business in Latin America. The ninth annual ranking includes 100 attorneys from 58 law firms — major firms as well as boutique firms — and spans 12 categories, including arbitration & litigation, banking & finance, capital markets, corporate/M&A, energy, FCPA & fraud and project finance. The criteria used was a combination of factors, including 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 Refinitiv. Latinvex used data from our annual survey of international firms as well as publicly-available information. This year, 14 attorneyswere new compared with last year’s list. Keywords: Allen & Overy, Arent Fox, Arnold & Porter, Baker Botts, Beveridge & Diamond, Brown & Rudnick, Cassels Brock, Chaffetz Lindsey, Cleary Gottlieb, Conyers, Covington & Burling, Crowell & Moring, Davis Polk, Debevoise & Plimpton, Diaz Reus, Foley Hoag, Freshfields, Fridman Fels & Soto, Gowling WLG, Haynes and Boone, Herbert Smith Freehills, Hogan Lovells, Holland & Knight, Hughes Hubbard, Hunton Andrews Kurth, Jenner & Block, Jones Day, K&L Gates, Latham & Watkins, Littler Mendelson, Mayer Brown, McDermott Will & Emery, Milbank, Miller & Chevalier, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, Morrisson & Foerster, Nelson Mullins, Paul Hastings, Proskauer Rose, Quinn Emanuel, Reed Smith, Ropes & Gray, Sequor Law , Shearman & Sterling, Sheppard Mullin, Sidley Austin, Simpson Thacher, Skadden, Squire Patton Boggs, Sullivan & Cromwell, Thompson & Knight, Vinson & Elkins, Wasserman West, White & Case, Willkie, Wilson Sonsini, Winston & Strawn and Winston Legal Group. 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 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..

This article outlines cross-border asset recovery as an emerging legal niche in Chile, describing how teams of lawyers, investigators, and forensic accountants pursue hidden assets across jurisdictions using networks like Fraud Net. Recuperar activos ocultos en el extranjero: Nuevo nicho para abogados Open In the News Open November 7, 2017 3 minutes read Sequor Law Las estrategias combinan legislaciones de distintos países. By Antonio Collados El peruano Vladimiro Montecinos, el chileno Alberto Chang y el matrimo‐ nio filipino de Imelda y Ferdinando Marcos tienen algo en común: oculta‐ ron en el extranjero los bienes que obtuvieron mediante fraudes. Si bien la recuperación transnacional de activos es un área de práctica legal muy extendida en el mundo, es muy poco conocida en Chile. Se trata de un área de derecho relativamente nueva, en donde se requiere trabajar en equipo no solamente de abogados de distintos países, sino también con investigadores y con contadores forenses, según explica Guillermo Jorge, jurista argentino que participó el viernes pasado en un almuerzo organizado por el Estudio Rivadeneira Colombara Zegers, al cual asistieron algunos profesionales chilenos y varios expertos internacionales. Esta oficina se está integrando a una red internacional de estudios que se dedica a estos temas y que están agrupadas en Fraud Net, donde hay abogados de Estados Unidos, Argentina, Suiza y Reino Unido. La especialidad también se aplica a casos de divorcios de personas de alto patrimonio en que uno de los cónyuges tiene parte de sus bienes fuera de su país, como fue el caso del ex futbolista y actual entrenador del Atlético Madrid, Diego Simeone, cuya bien asesorada ex esposa obtuvo 20 millones de euros como producto de estas pesquisas. En el seminario del viernes, el abogado estadounidense Edward Davis Jr. destacó el sigilo como uno de los aspectos más relevantes de estas gestiones. “Esto es como cuando un tigre sale a cazar, se mueve con mucha tranquilidad, se toma su tiempo, es silencioso, pero no es lento”, dijo. Davis asegura que todo se hace de una manera diseñada para que no alerte a la persona que está escondiendo el activo, porque el dinero puede moverse de un día para otro. “Hay que ser un tigre inteligente y ágil”, agrega Jorge, su colega argentino, quien destaca que algo que les da mucha agilidad a los equipos de abogados privados son los recursos. Explica que un fiscal debe ceñirse a procedimientos lentos y formalidades para pedir cooperación internacional, lo que contrasta con las redes de abogados privados conectados en grupos de whatsapp, con bases de datos a las que acceden simultáneamente. Una “Interpol privada” De acuerdo a la descripción que realizan, estos equipos trabajan como “una suerte de Interpol privada”, ya que pueden reaccionar rápidamente y actuar de manera simultánea en todos los países que sea necesario, según comenta Ciro Colombara, socio del estudio chileno, quien explica que la globalización hace que los conflictos jurídicos también sean globales. “Casi todos los casos relevantes tienen una arista internacional y en el caso de los temas económicos es muy habitual que los activos económicos estén en otros países, especialmente en paraísos fiscales”, añade. Esto hace que el conocimiento idiosincrático de las distintas jurisdicciones donde tendrán lugar las pesquisas sea una clave fundamental de su éxito. “Si le pides a un juez de un país ‘A’ que le pida algo a un juez del país ‘B’, se lo tienes que pedir en un lenguaje tal que él lo lea como algo muy parecido a lo que hace todos los días, hay que saber cómo hacer coincidir los sistemas, qué palabras claves incluir”, dice Arnie Lacayo , otro experto de Estados Unidos que participó en el seminario. Tanto Lacayo como Davis Jr. trabajan actualmente en el caso Stanford, un fraude de más de US$5 mil millones, sólo superado en magnitud por el caso Madoff, en que la defraudación alcanzó los US$50 mil millones. Los especialistas explicaron que la clave en estos casos es la capacidad de seguir el flujo del dinero para entender cómo se hizo el fraude, dónde están los activos y así definir la forma de recuperarlos. Para leer el artículo completo, oprime aquí. 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 shareholders Edward Davis, Gregory Grossman, Leyza B. Florin, and Fernando Menendez are recognized in the 2022 edition of the Best Lawyers in America across multiple categories. Sequor Law Recognized in the 2022 Edition of the Best Lawyers in America Open Awards & Recognition Open August 19, 2021 1 minute read Sequor Law Sequor Law is pleased to announce that four of the firms Shareholders were recognized in multiple categories in the 2022 28 th Edition of Founding Shareholder Edward Davis was recognized in Bet-the-Company Litigation , Commercial Litigation , International Arbitration – Commercial and Litigation – Banking and Finance , Founding Shareholder Gregory Grossman was recognized in Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law and Litigation – Bankruptcy, Shareholder Leyza B. Florin was recognized in Commercial Litigation and Litigation – Bankruptcy and Shareholder Fernando Menendez was recognized in Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law. Visit www.bestlawyers.com to see the latest edition. 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 moderates a cross-border panel on Commercial Real Estate Post-COVID at the ABI International Insolvency & Restructuring Symposium. A Worldwide View on Commercial Real Estate Post-COVID Open Events & Speaking Open November 22, 2021 1 minute read Sequor Law Sequor Law Shareholder and International IWIRC Chair Leyza B. Florin moderated an insightful cross-border panel on Commercial Real Estate Post-COVID at the ABI International Insolvency & Restructuring Symposium. Joining the panel were Liz Machado, Dr. CS Mamta Binani, Jo Hewitt and Dr Annerose Tashiro. Congratulations on an informative session! 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 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 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 Gregory Grossman advises on Marangoni Tread Latino America's Chapter 15 filing in Miami, seeking recognition of Brazilian restructuring proceedings to investigate detrimental transactions. Brazilian tyre co files Chapter 15 to probe “detrimental” transactions Open In the News Open February 21, 2019 2 minutes read Sequor Law By Declan Bush Marangoni Tread’s Brazilian subsidiary is restructuring in Lagoa Santa. A subsidiary of the Italian tyre conglomerate Marangoni has asked a Miami court to recognize bankruptcy proceedings it has entered in Brazil to investigate possible US assets. Marangoni Tread Latino America filed for Chapter 15 protection on 15 February in the US Bankruptcy Court in Miami, with Sequor Law partner Gregory Grossman advising. In the Chapter 15 filing, Marangoni Tread’s judicial manager Otávio De Paoli Balbino said he was appointed by the Second Civil Court of Lagoa Santa, Minas Gerais, on 25 January to investigate “detrimental” transactions between the company and its subsidiaries. Balbino, a partner at law firm Paoli Balbino & Barros Sociedade de Advogados, asked the court to recognize the Brazilian restructuring so he could investigate the company’s US dealings. Marangoni Tread filed judicial reorganization proceedings in the Lagoa Santa court in September 2017 and the case was accepted on 13 November. The company claimed it was hit by Brazil’s 2014 recession, low sales, payment defaults and a higher rubber price. It said it had about 58 million reais (US$15.6 million) and about 850 creditors at the time of filing. But the Brazilian court noted “many mistakes and inconsistencies” in the accounting records the company had provided, including an incomplete list of its managing director’s personal assets. The court tasked Balbino and accountant Cleber Batista de Sousa with investigating transactions between Marangoni Tread and its Italian owners, its one Argentinean subsidiary, and four Brazilian subsidiaries. Batista found “several inconsistencies between the balance sheets and the financial books provided” and concluded several transactions “had detrimental impacts to the debtor’s finances”. He also found the subsidiaries may have acquired products manufactured by Marangoni Tread for less than their production cost. Balbino said Marangoni Tread “may have had transactions with the US subsidiary of the (Marangoni) conglomerate and other American companies”. “I need to investigate the possibility that assets in the US may have been acquired using funds belonging to the debtor,” Balbino added. Marangoni Tread was incorporated in 1998 and is owned by Italian companies Marangoni and Eurorubber. The company owned 51% of Marangoni Argentina and 99% of four Brazilian subsidiaries, but sold its shares in the subsidiaries “for little or no consideration” a year before its bankruptcy filing, according to the documents filed in the Chapter 15 case. In the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida, Miami Marangoni Tread Latino America Industria e Comercio de Artefatos de Borracha, case 19-12070 Judge Laurel Isicoff Counsel to Marangoni Tread Latin America Sequor Law Founding shareholder Gregory Grossman and associate Bruno de Camargo in Miami In the Second Civil Court of Lagoa Santa, Minas Gerais Judge Carlos Alexandre Romano Carvalho Judicial manager to Marangoni Tread Paoli Balbino & Barros Sociedade de Advogados Partner Otávio De Paoli Balbino De Almeida Lima in Belo Horizonte Read the full article 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..

An overview of 28 U.S.C. § 1782, one of the most powerful discovery tools available to foreign litigants, allowing evidence gathering in US federal courts for use in international proceedings. Section 1782 Remains One of the Most Powerful Discovery Tools as Appellate Courts Uphold its Use in Aid of Private Commercial Arbitration Open Legal Insights Open June 10, 2020 4 minutes read Sequor Law 28 U.S.C. § 1782, known colloquially as “Section 1782,” is a federal statute that allows foreign litigants and interested persons to request judicial assistance from U.S. federal courts to obtain evidence for use in a proceeding in a foreign or international tribunal. Section 1782 is highly relevant to a wide array of legal practitioners, both within and outside the U.S., as federal courts have concluded that evidence obtained through Section 1782 may be used in civil, criminal, probate, bankruptcy, marital, administrative, and regulatory cases. In short, if your client is not using Section 1782 as part of its litigation strategy, there is a good chance that your client’s opponent is using it to your client’s disadvantage. Section 1782 is an alternative to the slower, and oftentimes cumbersome, cross-border discovery mechanisms such as letters rogatory and diplomatic or consular channels, because it can be pursued directly by the litigant or interested party without the involvement of the foreign court or tribunal or of the governmental authorities making up the traditional channels. Section 1782 was enacted decades ago and was revised extensively in 1964, but its widespread use did not take off until after the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2004 ruling in Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. against Intel Corp. , or “Intel” as the seminal decision is widely known. In the Intel case, the Supreme Court clarified the statutory requirements that an applicant has to satisfy to obtain evidence using Section 1782 as well as a number of discretionary factors courts should also consider. If the applicant is successful, it can obtain U.S.-style discovery from persons or entities located where the application is filed (in the form of site inspections, requests for production of documents, or deposition testimony under oath) for use in the foreign proceeding. Typical Section 1782 subpoena targets include businesses (including affiliated companies and subsidiaries), financial institutions, professionals such as lawyers and accountants, brokers, escrow agents, art galleries and auction houses, former employees, and many more. This incredibly powerful tool can also be pursued on an ex parte basis (at least initially) and does not require the applicant to prove that she has exhausted her domestic evidence gathering tools in the foreign case or, significantly, that the evidence will be admissible in the foreign proceeding. One issue that has been contested since Intel was decided is whether Section 1782 can be used in support of a private commercial arbitration (as opposed to treaty-based arbitrations where the use of Section 1782 is clearly supported by the applicable case law). Recently, the Sixth Circuit and Fourth Circuit Courts of Appeals broke with the Second and Fifth Circuits and determined that interested parties may rely on Section 1782 to obtain evidence for use in a privately constituted international arbitration proceeding. In September 2019, the Sixth Circuit analyzed the definition and interpretation of the word “tribunal” at length (relying on the ordinary meaning of the word, several dictionary definitions, the use of the word in legal writing, and an examination of the statute’s text, context and structure) and held that the language of Section 1782 unambiguously “includes private commercial arbitral panels established pursuant to contract and having the authority to issue decisions and bind the parties.” Abdul Latif Jameel Transportation Co. Ltd. v. FedEx Corp. , 939 F.3d 710, 723 (6th Cir. 2019). A few months later, the Fourth Circuit followed. In March 2020, the Fourth Circuit agreed that private arbitral tribunals are “foreign tribunals” within the meaning of Section 1782, and rejected a litany of policy arguments advanced by the respondent. Servotronics, Inc. v. Boeing Co. , 954 F.3d 209 (4th Cir. 2020). Although district court decisions have been deeply divided on the issue since Intel, there is now strong momentum gathering at the appellate level favoring the use of Section 1782 in aid of private commercial arbitration. For example, California district courts had uniformly followed the Second and Fifth Circuits in holding that an applicant may not obtain evidence through Section 1782 for use in a private commercial arbitration—until recently. In February 2020, a federal court in the Northern District of California adopted the reasoning and conclusion of the Sixth Circuit’s decision regarding Section 1782’s application to private international arbitration. HRC-Hainan Holding Company, LLC v. Yihan Hu , No. 19-mc-80277, 2020 WL 906719 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 25, 2020). That case is now on appeal, and the Ninth Circuit is positioned to rule on the issue. In sum, the already powerful Section 1782 has seen its applicability bolstered by two of the highest courts in the U.S. indicating that Section 1782 will remain an indispensable tool in any international lawyer’s toolbox for the foreseeable future. About the authors: Arnie Lacayo ( alacayo@sequorlaw.com ) is a Shareholder and Cristina Vicens ( cvicens@sequorlaw.com ) is an Attorney at Sequor Law. Lacayo and Vicens focus their practices on investigations, financial fraud and corruption-related asset recovery cases, as well as cross-border insolvency. Both Lacayo and Vicens have extensive experience with the Section 1782 statute, including in some of the most-cited cases in the U.S. 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 Raul Torrao explain UNCITRAL's 2019 Model Law on Enterprise Group Insolvency and its implications for cross-border insolvency proceedings. Asset recovery column: The mechanics of the UNCITRAL Model Law on Enterprise Group Insolvency Open Legal Insights Open December 4, 2019 8 minutes read Sequor Law Sequor Law shareholder Leyza B. Florin and attorney Raul Torrao in Miami discuss the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL)’s newly approved Model Law on Enterprise Group Insolvency. Purpose The model law, approved in July 2019, is a new legal framework designed to address domestic and cross-border insolvency cases involving multiple debtors that are members of the same enterprise group. Though it provides innovative tools to address the specific needs of proceedings involving enterprise groups, its practical use will be revealed throughout the next years by its implementation and actual application by the courts of states that adopt the model law. UNCITRAL developed the Model Law on Enterprise Group Insolvency to fill a void left by the 1997 Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency, with respect to the administration of multiple insolvency proceedings affecting different members of an enterprise group located in multiple jurisdictions. Indeed, in today’s global economy, the operations of the members of some enterprise groups are so interconnected and span so many jurisdictions that the group can only be appropriately reorganized or liquidated if there is a plan that embraces the whole group – or at least the part of the group that is affected by the insolvency proceedings. Both model laws provide for the cooperation of courts presiding over cross-border insolvency cases, although each applies in a different context. The Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency focuses on single debtor insolvency proceedings, while the Model Law on Enterprise Group Insolvency is designed to address the specific needs of insolvency proceedings that involve multiple debtors that are members of the same enterprise group in different jurisdictions. Concepts To address such specific needs, the Model Law on Enterprise Group Insolvency provides directives on coordination and cooperation between courts and among insolvency representatives, development of a group insolvency solution for the whole enterprise group or part of it in a single planning proceeding, the appointment of a single representative to coordinate the development of a group insolvency solution and voluntary participation of enterprise group members in the planning proceeding regardless of whether they are affected by the insolvency of part of the enterprise group. It also includes directives on access by foreign courts and insolvency representatives to the planning proceeding, cross-border recognition of foreign planning proceedings, and measures to minimize the commencement of non-main and main proceedings through the equal treatment of claims in a foreign main proceeding in an adopting jurisdiction. The Model Law on Enterprise Group Insolvency uses some nomenclature and definitions from the Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency, such as what is a main proceeding, a non-main proceeding, and the center of main interest (COMI) of a debtor. In addition, the Model Law on Enterprise Group Insolvency contains several articles similar to the Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency, especially in the chapters regarding the cooperation and coordination between courts and among insolvency representatives and in the chapters that provide for the recognition of a foreign proceeding. Among the new concepts introduced by the Model Law on Enterprise Group Insolvency, the “group insolvency solution” is one of the most relevant ones. Article 2(f) of the model law broadly defines a group insolvency solution as “a proposal or set of proposals developed in a planning proceeding for the reorganization, sale or liquidation of some or all of the assets and operations of one or more enterprise group members, with the goal of protecting, preserving, realizing or enhancing the overall combined value of those enterprise group members.” The draft guide of enactment of the model law clarifies that the term is intended to be a flexible concept, that can be tailored to address the specific circumstances of the enterprise group, such as its structure, business model, degree and type of integration between enterprise group members and other factors. The group insolvency solution is developed in a “planning proceeding,” which is an insolvency proceeding commenced with respect to an enterprise group member that meets certain criteria. It must be a main proceeding taking place in the jurisdiction where an enterprise group member debtor has the COMI, in which the enterprise group member likely is a necessary and integral participant of the solution (although the concept is still undefined). It must include the voluntary participation of enterprise group members for the development of a group insolvency solution (although they may opt-out at any point), and include the appointment of a group representative, which may be the same person as the insolvency representative appointed in the main proceeding or a different person. Once a planning proceeding is established, the group representative may seek relief from the court that is either needed to preserve the possibility of developing or implementing a group insolvency solution, or to protect, preserve, realize, or enhance the value of assets of an enterprise group member subject to or participating in a planning proceeding or the interests of the creditors of such enterprise group member. Relief The model law provides for a non-exhaustive list of reliefs that are typically granted in insolvency proceedings. This includes empowering the group representative to seek recognition of the planning proceeding in other jurisdictions and seek any relief available to support the development and implementation of a group insolvency solution, as well as seek to participate in foreign proceedings relating to an enterprise group member regardless of whether the latter is participating in the planning proceeding. Despite the model law’s aim to centralize an enterprise group’s insolvency proceeding, nothing in the model law prevents more than one planning proceeding from being established. Obviously, the immoderate commencement of multiple planning proceedings would destroy the purpose of having a centralized proceeding where all parties can meet and develop a group insolvency solution. However, the special circumstances driven by the way enterprise groups are structured might justify the exceptional establishment of more than one planning proceeding to obtain the proper insolvency solution for the group. To aid its goal of centralizing and streamlining insolvency proceedings of members of an enterprise group, the model law also provides a mechanism to minimize the commencement of non-main proceedings in other jurisdictions. A creditor of any enterprise group member may choose to bring its claim directly in the main proceeding commenced in a jurisdiction that adopted the model law. The claim will be treated in the main proceeding in accordance with the treatment it would be accorded in its original jurisdiction; that is, the foreign claim will receive the same distribution and priority rights in the main proceeding as it would receive in its original jurisdiction. To accomplish such treatment of claims, the claim treatment must: be presented by the insolvency representative appointed in the main proceeding – or jointly by the insolvency representative and the group representative; meet any additional formal requirements established by the jurisdiction of the main proceeding; and be approved by the court of the main proceeding. Once the claim treatment is approved, it is enforceable and binding on the insolvency estate of the main proceeding, this way protecting the creditor of the foreign claim. In addition to the above-described mechanism, the model law allows the court of the foreign forum where the creditor could have brought the aforementioned foreign claim to approve the treatment accorded in the main proceeding and to stay any non-main proceedings already commenced or to decline the commencement of new non-main proceedings. The effect of this implementation is that creditors of similar foreign claims may only file such foreign claims before the court of the main proceeding. This measure is not mandatory and it is the option of the court of the original jurisdiction of the foreign claim to use such tool. The model law also provides for this undertaking on the treatment of foreign claims and the possibility of the court to stay or decline to commence a new insolvency proceeding also in relation to a main proceeding. In other words, creditors of a claim that may be brought in a main proceeding in one jurisdiction also have the option to file the claim in another main proceeding affecting one of the enterprise group members in another jurisdiction that adopted the model law, and courts of the first jurisdiction may approve the undertaking on the treatment of that claim and stay or decline to commence a main proceeding. This measure is counterintuitive and is inconsistent with the expectations of creditors, the enterprise group members, and third parties that expect that insolvency proceedings should be conducted in the jurisdiction where the COMI of the enterprise group is located. Thus, the draft guide to the enactment of the model law advises that such measure should only be taken in exceptional circumstances, specifically when the efficiency benefits largely outweigh the negative effects on the creditors’ expectations. The provisions that refer to minimizing the commencement of main proceedings are located in part B of the model law, and are available for adoption by jurisdictions that want to take this extra step on the centralization of cross-border insolvency proceedings. It is important to note that the Model Law on Enterprise Group Insolvency is not a workaround from the formalities of the insolvency laws of the adopting jurisdiction. The fact that a planning proceeding may address the reorganization or liquidation of a participating enterprise group member does not grant unrestrictive access by creditors to the assets of that enterprise group member. Under the model law, relief in the planning proceeding may not be granted with respect to the assets of participating enterprise group members if the entity is not subject to an insolvency proceeding under the forum’s applicable laws, unless the reason that such proceeding has not commenced was for the purpose of minimizing the commencement of insolvency proceedings in accordance with the Model Law. In addition, if the participating enterprise group member has its COMI in another jurisdiction, relief will only be granted in the jurisdiction that adopted the model law if it does not interfere with the administration of insolvency proceedings taking place in other jurisdictions. Impact The framework presented by the Model Law on Enterprise Group Insolvency not only creates new legal tools for specific insolvency cases, but also creates a new international cooperation system to enhance the insolvency proceedings of an enterprise group. Though issues regarding the jurisdiction and the power of courts may be minimized in a single-debtor cross-border insolvency case under the Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency, such issues are more prevalent when members of an enterprise group are subject to insolvency proceedings in different jurisdictions. Indeed, in a multi-debtor cross-border insolvency case under the Model Law on Enterprise Group Insolvency, several issues regarding the jurisdictional power of the courts involved are likely to arise. This is because there are potentially multiple main proceedings, each located in a different jurisdiction, and only one – or a few – of them can be qualified as a planning proceeding for the development of a group solution, which will determinate the outcome of the insolvency proceedings. It is unclear if the Model Law on Enterprise Group Insolvency’s cooperation system will only be useful if all jurisdictions involved have adopted its text. With regard to the Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency, generally only the jurisdiction of the court that is providing assistance to the foreign proceeding must have adopted it in order for that cooperation system to work. On the other hand, the cooperation between courts of different jurisdictions in a group insolvency case might not work if one of the involved jurisdictions has not adopted the Model Law on Enterprise Group Insolvency. It is possible that jurisdictions that do not adopt provisions relating to centralized planning proceedings will be reluctant to defer their jurisdiction over an insolvency proceeding involving an enterprise group member to another jurisdiction. Hopefully, jurisdictions will see the benefits of having a group insolvency solution for maintaining or adding value to the whole group, or even to the group members that are affected by the insolvency proceeding in that jurisdiction, and utilize the new tools provided by the new model law. 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..

Global Restructuring Review profiles Sequor Law as a GRR 100 firm, highlighting its roots as a rebrand of Astigarraga Davis’s cross-border insolvency and asset recovery team led by Edward H. Davis, Jr. and Gregory Grossman, and its work for the Chilean liquidator of Onix Capital. Global Restructuring Review Top 100 Law Firms Listing Open Awards & Recognition Open July 31, 2017 2 minutes read Sequor Law Miami’s newly rebranded Sequor Law is the Chilean liquidator of bankrupt investment vehicle Onix Capital Global head of restructuring and insolvency Gregory Grossman History of the practice Shareholders Edward Davis and Gregory Grossman launched boutique Sequor Law in April, in what was effectively a rebrand of Miami firm Astigarraga Davis’ cross-border insolvency, international asset recovery and financial fraud team. Davis and Grossman, two of the founders of Astigarraga Davis, decided to establish the new outfit when their former firm’s international arbitration practice left to join global law firm Reed Smith. All of the attorneys from Astigarraga Davis’ cross-border insolvency, international asset recovery, and financial fraud practice were retained by Sequor Law. Network Grossman heads up the firm’s international insolvency and financial litigation practice, which operates out of a solitary office in Miami. Who uses it? The team represents international banks, sovereign governments and government institutions, liquidators and receivers, lenders and multinational corporations, as well as individuals. Some notable clients include Big Four professional services firm PricewaterhouseCoopers and the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago. Historic track record The practice, under Astigarraga Davis and Sequor Law, has made over 20 Chapter 15 filings in the US to recognise insolvency proceedings in diverse jurisdictions including Antigua, Austria, Barbados, Brazil, the BVI, the Cayman Islands, Chile, Mexico, Romania and the UK. Indeed, Grossman says the firm has filed more Chapter 15s than any other law firm in the US. Notably, Davis and Grossman filed the first Chapter 15 bankruptcy petition in the state of Florida, on behalf of PricewaterhouseCoopers as the custodian of failed financial institution Bancafe International Barbados. Davis also served as lead civil counsel for the government of Antigua and Barbuda in relation to an alleged fraud in the payment of debt owed to a Japanese leader that sponsored the building of the Crabbs Desalination and Power Plant in northeast Antigua. Elsewhere, the team was instructed to represent the joint liquidators of Stanford International Bank in efforts to recover assets relating to a US $7 billion Ponzi scheme- the second largest Ponzi scheme in world history, which has seen filings in Antigua, the UK, the US and Canada. Recent events During our research period, Sequor Law was instructed as counsel to the court-appointed liquidator and foreign representative of bankrupt Chilean investment firm Onix Capital in Chapter 15 proceedings in Florida. The liquidator is seeking to recover assets in excess of $100 million* relating to an alleged Ponzi scheme operated by the group’s CEO, Chilean businessman Alberto Chang-Rajii. The Sequor team also continues to act as primary US counsel to the joint liquidators of Stanford International Bank. The complete GRR 100 guide will be accessible at Global Restructuring Review website * The GRR 100 incorrectly values the Onix case as a $7.4 million dollar Ponzi scheme. The correct value of the Ponzi scheme is in excess of $100 million. 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 Daniel Coyle explains the asymmetrical nature of discovery in Chapter 15 proceedings, where foreign representatives can obtain discovery while resisting demands from other parties. Just Say No: Discovery in Chapter 15 Bankruptcies is Asymmetrical Open Legal Insights Open April 21, 2021 1 minute read Sequor Law By: Dan Coyle Foreign Representatives in Chapter 15 petitions are specifically permitted to conduct discovery to locate the debtor’s assets within the United States to increase estate and creditor recoveries in the overseas proceedings and to probe the debtor’s affairs, rights, obligations or liabilities. In the U.S. ancillary proceeding, the Foreign Representative will encounter resistance and other entities may seek to propound subpoenas under Fed. R. Bankr. 2004. Sometimes, these entities are creditors who seek information relevant to their claim or assets available to pay the same. Other times, these entities are subpoena targets who seek to gain a peek into the Foreign Representative’s search, seek to distract and/or delay the Foreign Representative from the asset search, or who seek to “punish” the Foreign Representative. The Foreign Representative may be able to avoid responding to such requests by moving for protective order or to quash the subpoena based upon 11 U.S.C. 1521(a)(4) and/or Rule 2004(a). The arguments are based upon: 1) the language of 1521(a)(4) and two canons of statutory construction, or, alternatively; 2) interpretive case law under Rule 2004 as to the requirements to show a “pecuniary interest” in a case. Read the original article 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..