Sequor Law's Daniel Coyle and Juan Mendoza present at a virtual CLE on emerging Chapter 15 issues and comparative enactments of the UNCITRAL Model Law in the UK and Brazil. Virtual September CLE Luncheon Open Events & Speaking Open September 14, 2021 1 minute read Sequor Law Emerging Issues in Chapter 15 and Comparative Enactments of the Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency Daniel Coyle and Juan Mendoza of Sequor Law, along with colleagues Edward Comey-Law Clerk to Hon. Michael Williamson, Lucianna Lima-Duarte Foressell Advogados and Sarah Murray-Stevens & Bolton will provide a unique perspective on the enactment of the Model Law in the UK and Brazil and discuss some ways in which those enactments differ from the Model Law and how these laws tie into Chapter 15 under section 1508. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open 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.. Firm News Apr 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit...

This article shares guidance on answering tough law school interview questions by conveying why you’re a strong candidate and demonstrating confident, concise oral advocacy. How to Answer Tough Law School Interview Questions Open In the News Open May 10, 2018 5 minutes read Sequor Law By Ilana Kowarski In law school interviews, it’s important to explain why you’re a strong candidate, experts say. Trial lawyers and appellate lawyers are often asked questions by judges who expect an immediate response. These attorneys cannot waver over what to say; they must improvise and come up with a compelling argument. Some of the most influential attorneys in U.S. history are famous for their ability to deliver captivating, off-the-cuff speeches. Before he joined the U.S. Supreme Court, Justice Thurgood Marshall was a litigator known for his powerful speeches during civil rights cases. And Clarence Darrow – a trial attorney who represented clients in some of the most controversial legal disputes of the early 20th century like the “Scopes monkey trial” – was often lauded for his ability to sway juries with his remarks. Law school admissions committees strive to identify students who have the potential to have a lasting positive impact on the legal profession. That’s one reason why they look for applicants who have the capacity to speak with authority and conviction in a way that inspires others. But law schools also have a more pragmatic reason to recruit students with a silver tongue: Oral advocacy is a crucial part of many legal jobs. Attorney Andrew Ittleman, a founder and partner with the Fuerst Ittleman David & Joseph law firm in Miami, says that showing poise during a law school admissions interview is a must. “[In] exercises like that, you know, whether it’s sitting in an interview or arguing in court, you want to get to a place where you can be loose going in,” Ittleman says. “It’s not a test… Nobody is grading you the way that they would on a test. They want to see who you are as a person.” Ittleman advises law school applicants to conduct a few practice interviews with people they trust who can provide honest feedback. “Go through a couple of dry runs,” he suggests. Ittleman says practice interviews help students discover the right words to use to clearly express their thoughts. With that in mind, attorneys say that law school applicants should figure out how they’d like to answer the following questions before their admissions interviews. Why do you want to become a lawyer? Experts say this is a question that J.D. applicants must have a compelling answer for, because law schools are wary of admitting students who view law school as a delay tactic to avoid making a career choice. “I believe strongly that we should prepare and produce graduates who passionately want to be lawyers, because I believe lawyers who are passionate about what they are doing will be happy lawyers,” says Kathleen Boozang, dean of the Seton Hall University School of Law in New Jersey. “And so I am looking to see that the student is going to law school because they are inspired to go to law school, as opposed to [because] they really can’t think of anything else to do.” Why are you applying to this particular law school? “Students should go into interviews knowing everything on that school’s website, its values, how it describes itself, who the star professors are, etc.,” says Ella Tyler, a retired lawyer who works as a tutor for Varsity Tutors, a virtual education platform. “Law requires preparation and research, so if you showcase those skill sets in your interview, it’s proof that you have what it takes to be a lawyer.” What kind of law are you most interested in practicing? What is your dream law job? If you want to use a law degree in an unconventional way, such as in a policy job or a nonlegal business position, you may be asked: Why do you need a law degree? What would a law degree allow you to do professionally that you couldn’t do without the degree?Experts say law schools are looking for applicants who can clearly articulate how they intend to use a J.D., because these schools don’t want to admit students who lack a clear justification for investing the time, effort and expense that law school requires.“Law school is hard, it’s a lot of work, and you have to have the spark,” Boozang says. “You have to have a passion, you need to want to do it, and I want to just confirm that the student knows what they are getting into and that the desire is real.” What book are you reading at the moment, and what do you think of it? If you aren’t currently reading a book, you may be asked an alternative question: Who is your favorite author and why?Boozang says she asks questions like this to see whether a J.D. applicant is intellectually curious, enjoys the written word and can formulate a coherent argument about what he or she has read. The ability to analyze a text is a key skill for an aspiring lawyer, Boozang says.Questions of this type are also meant to reveal whether an applicant has a well-rounded personality that includes interests besides academics, Boozang says. She advises applicants to read the news and continue pursuing their extracurricular interests during the law school admissions process, because it gives them something interesting to discuss when they are asked personal questions.“I emphasize the importance to young people thinking about law school the need to be thinking about the world around them,” she says. What college paper are you most proud of? The thinking behind this question is that it allows a J.D. applicant to discuss a subject they are enthusiastic and knowledgeable about, Boozang says. This interview question illuminates the way an applicant thinks and clarifies whether they have the mindset of a future attorney, she adds.Boozang says a J.D. applicant who is asked this question should be prepared to answer follow-up queries about his or her paper, which may ultimately lead to a back-and-forth discussion with the interviewer. She says that the topic or thesis of the paper will be less relevant to the interviewer than whether the applicant is able to clearly explain his or her ideas and make a coherent argument. How would you contribute to a law school class? Experts say questions like this give law school applicants an opportunity to differentiate themselves from their competitors in the J.D. admissions process.Nyana Abreu, an attorney at Sequor Law in Miami, says the key to answering this question well is to talk less about academic statistics and more about who you are as a person.“That’s not an academic question, and I think that’s something that a lot of candidates miss – that when you’re given an opportunity to talk about yourself, they don’t want to know your GPA [and] they don’t want to know your test scores,” she says. “They already know all those types of things. They want to know something memorable about you. So I would say, think of that question as more of a first date question. You’re not so much telling the interviewer why you’re so studious and hardworking. You’re telling the interviewer why people want to spend time with you.” 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 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.. Firm News Apr 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit...

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 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.. Firm News Apr 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit...

An Australian court recognised CP Legal partner Carlos Parada Abate as liquidator and foreign representative of Alberto Chang Rajii under Australia’s Cross-Border Insolvency Act, building on earlier recognition decisions in Florida, the UK and Isle of Man and Chapter 15 recognition of the Onix proceedings. Chilean liquidator in alleged Ponzi case recognised in Australia Open In the News Open February 13, 2018 3 minutes read Sequor Law By Douglas Thomson An Australian court has become the latest to recognise Chilean liquidation proceedings in what is alleged to be the South American state’s first major Ponzi scheme dismantling, following courts in the US, UK and Isle of Man. JusticeJacqueline Gleeson at the Federal Court of Australia’s New South Wales registry in Sydney recognised CP Legal partner Carlos Parada Abate as liquidator and foreign representative of the estate of Chilean businessman Alberto Chang Rajii, under Australia’s Cross-Border Insolvency Act in a ruling on 29 January. She also recognised proceedings to liquidate Chang’s assets before the 15 th Civil Court of Santiago as a foreign main proceeding under the Australia’s embodiment of the UNCITRAL Model Law. The court followed up with a notice to creditors on 2 February. The recognitions follow a trio of similar decisions by courts in Florida, London and the Isle of Man over the course of September. The US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida has also granted Chapter 15 recognition of separate Chilean proceedings liquidating Chang’s investment vehicle Onix, a company he co-founded with his mother in 2009. Chang is accused of using Onix to defraud investors through a set of promissory notes guaranteed by what was in fact another Chang company, Grupo Arcano. The US Securities and Exchange Committee has accused him of manufacturing an identity as an award-winning angel investor, holding himself out as an early Google financier with an MBA from Stanford University, who falsely told investors their money would be put into Silicon Valley companies like Uber and Snapchat. Liquidator Parada has said in court filings that in fact Chang only invested a small part of the funds, using them to fund a lavish lifestyle for himself instead. Onix went into compulsory liquidation in May 2016 after it defaulted on its liabilities to a Chilean creditor, with the Santiago court appointing Parada as its liquidator. The company had over US$120 million in liabilities to over 1,000 creditors at the time of its liquidation. A year later, Chiang’s own estate was placed in compulsory liquidation by the 15 th Civil Court of Santiago and Parada was appointed to oversee this case too. Chang is now facing charges in Chile of fraud, money laundering and operating without a valid licence. He left Chile for Malta the month before Onix’s liquidation and although he was arrested there in December 2016, the Maltese courts have refused Chile’s request for his extradition. Chile has appealed that ruling. In a service ruling in December, the Australian court described Chang’s current whereabouts as unknown, though he did then appear at a hearing relating to his extradition from Malta on 24 January. The court said he would be served through his personal email address and his Chilean legal counsel. Parada was represented in the Australian proceedings by Sydney firm Arnold Bloch Leibler, and the hearings were attended by Sequor Law partner Edward Davis from Miami, his US counsel. Davis says, “We are very happy to have obtained, along with local counsel, additional recognition for Mr Parada in Australia which will allow him to secure real estate, bank accounts and artwork that are believed to be worth more than AU$5 million [US$4 million] in value.” Chang’s alleged personal spending on properties in Australia, the British Virgin Islands, Miami and London has instigated the global round of recognition proceedings for his Chilean liquidation. Chang’s property on the territory’s Moskito Island was partially destroyed last year by Hurricane Irma. The asset is nevertheless among those in the territory being pursued by a companion BVI liquidation with Grant Thornton as liquidator and Parada as its largest creditor, as the BVI does not permit the recognition of foreign liquidators. In the Federal Court of Australia Bench Justice Jacqueline Gleeson Counsel to Carlos Parada Abate (liquidator and foreign representative) Arnold Bloch Leibler In the High Court of Justice of England and Wales, Chancery Division Counsel to Carlos Abate Parada (liquidator and foreign respresentative) PCB Litigation Partner Jon Felce in London In the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida In re: Alberto Samuel Chang Rajii Judge Laurel Isicoff Counsel to Carlos Abate Parada (liquidator and foreign representative) Sequor Law Founding shareholders Gregory Grossman and Edward Davis with partner Arnoldo Lacayo in Miami In the Isle of Man Counsel to Carlos Abate Parada (liquidator and foreign representative) Callin Wild Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open 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.. Firm News Apr 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit...

Sequor Law's Andrew B. Dawson, UM professor and Vice Dean, has been awarded the Judge A. Jay Cristol Endowed Chair in Bankruptcy at the University of Miami. Judge A. Jay Cristol Endowed Chair in Bankruptcy Open Awards & Recognition Open March 3, 2020 1 minute read Sequor Law Andrew (Drew) B. Dawson , Of counsel at Sequor Law , distinguished law professor, and Vice Dean of Academic Affairs at the University of Miami, has been awarded the Judge A. Jay Cristol Endowed Chair in Bankruptcy. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open 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.. Firm News Apr 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit...

Sequor Law Shareholder Leyza B. Florin, IWIRC International's Immediate Past Chair, is featured as IWIRC Florida's member spotlight, highlighting her unique journey from teacher to top attorney. Leyza B. Florin Featured as IWIRC Florida Member Spotlight Open In the News Open July 12, 2022 1 minute read Sequor Law Sequor Law Shareholder Leyza B. Florin , and IWIRC International’s Immediate Past Chair was this month’s IWIRC Florida’s member spotlight. Did you know Leyza started her career as a public school teacher? Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open 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.. Firm News Apr 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit...

Sequor Law's Amanda E. Finley examines how the EU's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) affects document discovery obligations in US litigation and insolvency proceedings. The Effect of the General Data Protection Regulation on Discovery in the United States Open Legal Insights Open December 8, 2020 4 minutes read Sequor Law By Amanda E. Finley , Miami The European Union implemented the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), and it became effective on 25 May 2018. 1 The GDPR enforces privacy requirements to protect EU citizens. 2 “The GDPR applies to the processing of ‘personal data,’ which is defined as any information related to an ‘identified or identifiable natural person,’” who can be directly or indirectly identified by the data produced. 3 The GDPR purports to have extraterritorial effect by applying “regardless whether the processing takes place in the EU or elsewhere.” 4 The GDPR allows imposition of penalties and sanctions that “significantly increase[d] the maximum fine to €20 million, or 4% of annual worldwide turnover, whichever is greater.” 5 Further, “[t]he GDPR provides an individual with access to the courts to seek a judicial remedy” in addition to any administrative remedy. 6 Essentially, any production of documents that contain information about EU citizens could cause serious consequences and large fines for a GDPR violation. The early cases in the United States suggest that the GDPR may have a profound impact on discovery in the United States. The GDPR may provide for targets subject to the jurisdiction of courts in the United States to object to discovery with the purpose (or possibly under the guise) of protecting EU citizens’ privacy. Defendants may object to production as a whole, request significant redaction of the discovery, request a strict confidentiality agreement, request to produce anonymized data that does not identify any EU citizen, or any combination thereof. There is limited case law on the implications of the GDPR on U.S. discovery because it is a relatively new regulation. So far, U.S. courts have taken divergent approaches on how to address and resolve objections to discovery based on the GDPR. Overall, it appears that most courts are allowing production of the discovery in some form, over a defendant’s GDPR objection. U.S. Courts’ Historical Response to Discovery Objections Based on Foreign Privacy Statutes or Secrecy Laws Historically, U.S. courts have been unwilling to allow a foreign privacy statute to preclude the production of responsive documents that were otherwise discoverable in U.S. litigation. As the Supreme Court stated, “[i]t is well settled that such statutes do not deprive an American court of the power to order a party subject to its jurisdiction to produce evidence even though the act of production may violate that statute.” 7 The Court further noted that the French “blocking statute” was “originally ‘inspired to impede enforcement of United States antitrust laws,’ and that it did not appear to have been strictly enforced in France,” which further undercut U.S. courts’ interest in enforcing that foreign privacy statute over the American interest of full disclosure in discovery. 8 Prior and subsequent courts similarly ruled that foreign privacy statutes are not dispositive on production of discovery in U.S. cases, although the statutes may be relevant to the issue of whether sanctions should be imposed for failure to comply with U.S. discovery orders. 9 Likewise, U.S. courts deemed foreign bank secrecy laws insufficient to preclude discovery in U.S. litigation. 10 Therefore, generally, courts in the United States overwhelmingly have held that full disclosure in discovery outweighs any interest in enforcing foreign privacy or secrecy laws. A Chronological Review of U.S. Courts’ Approaches to GDPR Discovery Disputes and Other Foreign Privacy Statutes On 5 October 2018, the first published ruling on GDPR in U.S. litigation involved a defendant, Microsoft, raising a GDPR objection to discovery based on the undue burden and cost of producing the discovery due to “the alleged tension with GDPR.” 11 The court did not significantly analyze the GDPR issue, but stated that “the court [wa]s not persuaded by Microsoft’s arguments concerning undue burden” and required the production of documents. 12 On 17 December 2018, the first substantive ruling by a U.S. court to address an objection to discovery based on GDPR was in the context of a 28 U.S.C. § 1782 application to obtain discovery for use in a foreign proceeding. 13 The court “grant[ed] the application with respect to documents held by foreign custodians only to the extent that the Applicants (1) assume the costs of the document production, including the costs of compliance with the GDPR or other applicable European data privacy laws and (2) indemnify Respondents against any potential breaches of European data privacy laws.” 14 Although the court granted production of the documents over the GDPR objection, this ruling has serious adverse consequences for parties seeking discovery in U.S. litigation if the GDPR is implicated because it required unknown and potentially multimillion-dollar indemnification liability on the party receiving the documents. The approach in Hansainvest of requiring indemnification of the discovery target “against any potential breaches of European data privacy laws” is a serious deterrent to any party seeking discovery. 15 It would be unusual and highly unlikely that any party would knowingly accept such an open-ended and potentially large financial risk given the large fines for a GDPR violation. If courts routinely adopted this approach, it would have a significant chilling effect on U.S. discovery when the GDPR is implicated. Hansainvest is the only U.S. court, thus far, to rule that indemnification of any GDPR liability is a condition precedent to production of the documents. In later rulings, U.S. courts have taken less drastic approaches to GDPR objections to discovery. Click here to read the full article in the Spring 2020 International Law Quarterly (page 16) and the Business Law Section. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open 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.. Firm News Apr 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit...

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 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.. Firm News Apr 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit...

Meet Sequor Law founding shareholder Edward H. Davis Jr., a Miami asset recovery attorney who pursues corrupt politicians and Ponzi schemers, seizing art, cars, and exotic assets worldwide. Art, Cars, Parrots and Other Spoils of Miami Fraud Lawyer Edward H. Davis Open In the News Open November 2, 2018 4 minutes read Sequor Law “Corruption is like an acid eating away the steel understructure of society,” said Edward H. Davis Jr. of Sequor Law, Miami, who’s made it his mission to pursue corrupt politicians and Ponzi-schemers hiding money, boats, sports cars and exotic pets around the globe.” By Raychel Lean Ask Miami asset recovery lawyer Edward H. Davis Jr. where in the world he hasn’t been, and he’ll have to pause for a moment to think. Israel — Davis hasn’t gone there yet. But by next week it’ll be the 81st country he’s visited, edging him one step closer to a spot in the Travelers’ Century Club. “You have to prove you’ve been to 100 countries to join,” Davis said. “I’m on my way.” Lucky for Davis, founding shareholder of Sequor Law, fraudsters don’t just leave stolen money in their backyard. They scatter it all over the globe, using it to buy outlandish collectibles, unconventional modes of transport and exotic pets. As a representative of fraud victims, it’s Davis’ job to seize those assets, sell them and return as much as possible to the client. “We’ve repossessed some very, very beautiful sports cars, yachts and airplanes. We’ve recovered land, houses, hotels,” Davis said. “One time we got a guy’s prized dog and prized parrot, and were able to sell them back to him for money to give to the victims.” Davis once recovered a Jean-Michel Basquiat painting, bought with money a fraudster had stolen from a Brazilian bank. He represented the liquidator in the case and sold the piece by the renowned painter for $13 million. “I hate to say this, but it looked like a 5-year- old drew it,” Davis said.” The fraudster paid $1.2 million for it, so we actually made money on that particular piece.” Davis also seized a Serge Poliakoff painting that once belonged to Edemar Cid Ferreira, former president of Brazilian bank Banco Santos, who was charged with money laundering. Offshore jurisdictions and remote islands are particularly popular hiding place for fraudsters, who “try to use places that are hard to get to and hard to find,” according to Davis. Mauritius, Guernsey, Dominica, the British Virgin Islands, Trinidad and Tobago, the Dutch and French sides of Saint Martin — all regular haunts. Davis has also been to Finland twice, but only to the airport, so it doesn’t count toward his 100-country goal. “I’m very strict about that,” he said. Early in his career, Davis represented a defrauded Guatemalan family business in a case spanning 10 jurisdictions . “I grew up dreaming about going to these places, and when you get there you still pinch yourself a little bit,” said Davis, who grew up in a tiny farm town near Buffalo, New York, where he said dairy cows outnumbered humans. Though it’s tough spending up to 100 nights away from home every year, the attorney says he still hasn’t gotten over the novelty. “I’ve been to Slovenia, Dubai, Hong Kong, India. I get to learn about other cultures, hear their language, eat their food, understand how they live,” Davis said. “And when you really get down to it, most people are pretty much the same. But instead of focusing on that 90 percent of stuff we all agree on, we tend to focus on the 10 percent that we disagree on.” The way Davis sees it, corruption is “the No. 1 thing that we have to fight in the world.” “Lack of medical care, lack of adequate clean water, food and housing can be stopped if we get rid of corruption,” he said. “It should be a human right to live in a society free from corruption, and it’s not.” On a daily basis, Davis encounters people who’ve lost everything “but the lint in their pocket,” so funding litigation can be a big problem. Third-party litigation funders have emerged in the last few years to help pay for asset recovery. But before then, Davis said, many cases languished and fraudsters went unpunished. Never a Pang of Guilt These criminals are almost always men — often “amazingly intelligent and charming” businessmen or politicians who, according to Davis, are “almost like computers,” unable to process emotion ”the way most normal human beings do.” “They can smile at you, tell you they love you, then steal your money and walk away, and never feel a pang of doubt, a pang of guilt. Nothing,” Davis said. “What’s really tragic is that most of them are so smart that they could actually do really well if they applied themselves.” At the beginning of every case, Davis and his team write two words on a white board — “We win.” “We ask every client, ‘What do you define as a win?’ Then we design a strategy to get to that point,” he said. Davis served as co-general counsel to the liquidators of Stanford International Bank in a case against Allen Stanford , the second most notorious Ponzi- schemer in history — after Bernie Madoff. He found many of Stanford’s victims were seniors, forced to return to work after losing their retirement. While sending perpetrators to jail provides a sense of justice, Davis admits this does nothing to restore what victims have lost. “Corruption is like an acid eating away the steel understructure of society,” he said. “If you let it get out of hand, and you don’t fight it and don’t get the money back, then eventually that acid will eat through the under-structure, the metal skeleton, and the whole society collapses.” Davis calls himself an “accidental lawyer,” having switched tracks from marine biology on a whim and taken the LSAT without studying. But since then, he’s developed an unwavering mission statement. “What I think we’re doing is restoring hope and trying to do our little part to help society work,” he said. “So much of what we have is based on trust, and the minute that people say they can’t trust, you’re done. We’re trying to counteract that.” Edward H. Davis Jr. Born: March 1962, Buffalo, New York Spouse: Kateri Davis Children: Ashley, Alissa and Jaclyn Davis Education: University of Miami, J.D., 1987; University of Miami, B.A., 1984 Experience: Founding shareholder, Sequor Law, 2017-present; founding shareholder, Astigarraga Davis, 2000-2017; founding shareholder, Davis, Devine, Goodman & Wells, 1998-1999; associate and partner, Steel Hector & Davis 1992-1998; law clerk and associate, Paul Landy Beiley & Harper, 1987- 1992. 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 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.. Firm News Apr 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit...

Sequor Law Shareholder Leyza B. Florin is named a finalist at the Chambers Diversity & Inclusion Awards: North America 2022, honoring her dedication to advancing D&I in the legal field. Leyza Florin Blanco Makes D&I North America Shortlist Open Awards & Recognition Open April 13, 2022 1 minute read Sequor Law We are delighted to announce Sequor Law Shareholder, Leyza B. Florin as a finalist at the Chambers Diversity & Inclusion Awards: North America 2022. These awards celebrate the fantastic achievements of firms, companies and individuals who are furthering the advancement of diversity and inclusion across the USA and Canada. Congratulations Leyza, and thank you for your endless dedication to promote diversity and inclusion in all you do! Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open 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.. Firm News Apr 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit...

Sequor Law's Ed Davis, Leyza Florin, and Juan Mendoza examine the challenges of seeking US recognition of individual debtors' foreign insolvency proceedings and COMI determination under Chapter 15. Asset recovery column: Recognition of an individual debtor’s insolvency proceeding – beware the perils Open Legal Insights Open March 27, 2019 5 minutes read Sequor Law Ed Davis, Leyza B. Florin and Juan Mendoza Shareholders Edward Davis Jr and Leyza B. Florin , and attorney Juan Mendoza from Sequor Law in Miami discuss the things to watch out for when seeking recognition of an individual debtor’s foreign insolvency proceedings in the US. Recognition of a foreign insolvency proceeding in the United States allows the use of an arsenal of asset recovery weapons for a cross-border practitioner, including the opportunity to obtain discovery relating to the financial condition of the debtor, and to commence actions to collect property and liquidate claims. This arsenal may be particularly effective in situations where an individual debtor flees the jurisdiction of his or her pending bankruptcy case to the United States. Such a change of circumstances may disturb the debtor’s ties with the jurisdiction of the pending insolvency, however, and alter the foreign trustee’s ability to obtain recognition of the foreign insolvency in the United States. This column discusses the nuances a practitioner must consider when pursuing recognition of an individual debtor’s foreign insolvency under Chapter 15. To obtain recognition of a “foreign main proceeding” under Chapter 15 – the United States’ analogue to the Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency – a foreign representative of the foreign insolvency proceeding must show, among other things, that the foreign proceeding is pending in the country where the debtor has his or her centre of main interests (COMI). An individual debtor’s COMI is defined as the debtor’s “habitual residence”. The foreign representative may also obtain recognition of the foreign proceeding as a foreign non-main proceeding if the debtor has an “establishment” in the country where the foreign proceeding is pending. “Establishment” is defined as a place of operations where a debtor carries out non-transitory economic activity. As the determination of an individual debtor’s COMI or establishment is a fact-intensive inquiry, the operative date for the determination of COMI or establishment could be pivotal in obtaining recognition. US courts are split on the operative date for the determination of the COMI. Some courts have noted that the operative date to determine the COMI is the date on which the Chapter 15 petition was filed. However, several US courts have held that the operative date for determining a debtor’s COMI or establishment is the date on which the foreign insolvency commenced. Though this split of authority is yet to be specifically addressed in the text of Chapter 15, UNCITRAL’s revision to the Guide to Enactment and Interpretation of the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency in 2013 clarified that the date of the commencement of the foreign proceeding is the operative date to determine the COMI. It would be up to the US Congress to pass an amendment to Chapter 15 to conform it to this development, which to date remains an open issue for US courts. In a situation where an individual debtor moves to the United States after the commencement of the initial insolvency proceeding and establishes residence and financial ties in the US, the determination of the COMI or establishment – and possibility of recognising the foreign insolvency proceeding – is a function of whether the operative date for the determination of COMI or establishment is the date of the filing of the initial proceeding or the Chapter 15 proceeding. If the operative date were the commencement of the foreign proceeding, as clarified by the Guide to the Model Law, the individual debtor’s habitual residence would likely be located in the foreign jurisdiction. This would likely result in the finding that the debtor’s COMI or establishment was the jurisdiction of the foreign proceeding. The opposite is true if the operative date is the date of the Chapter 15 filing, as the individual debtor may have developed close ties to the United States, such as changing address, opening new bank accounts and establishing other signs of permanency. Once the operative date is established, the court must analyse the debtor’s circumstances to determine the debtor’s COMI or establishment. As habitual residence is not defined by the bankruptcy statute, it raises yet another level of uncertainty. Though there is no definition for the term habitual residence, courts seem to equate habitual residence with domicile, a concept typically used in the bankruptcy context in the analysis of venue and exemptions to discharge. Like domicile, habitual residence refers to both an individual debtor’s physical presence, or residency, and the debtor’s intent to remain at that residence. The former consideration may seem like a straightforward one since it is hard to dispute a debtor’s physical presence. Yet situations arise where a debtor travels between two separate countries, which makes the analysis of physical presence more difficult. The latter consideration of intent requires an inquiry relating to the debtor’s state of mind, which involves both objective and subjective considerations. To assist with the analysis of the debtor’s state of mind, courts consider the location of a debtor’s family, the debtor’s reasons for moving, the length and continuity of the debtor’s residence, the stability and continuity of the debtor’s employment, and apparent intentions to remain at his or her residence. Courts also consider documents filed with governmental agencies, such as immigration documents, to discern whether a debtor intended to remain in a certain place. As every individual has different circumstances, the factual scenarios regarding the debtor’s habitual residence are endless. Consider the following examples: a businessperson who travels between offices in different countries with family in both countries; a couple that move to the United States on an investor visa but leave their children in their home country; and a person with no family who moves to the United States as a permanent resident but is incarcerated for a significant period. Each scenario would entail a unique analysis regarding the debtor’s state of mind. A Florida decision displays the factual complexity that may complicate an individual debtor’s Chapter 15 COMI analysis. In Richardson, the court analysed the habitual residence of an individual debtor who was in the process of moving to Florida from the UK under an investor visa, shortly after the commencement of an insolvency proceeding against him in the UK. Analysing the debtor’s COMI as of the commencement of the UK insolvency proceeding, the bankruptcy court noted that as of that date, the debtor no longer owned a home in the UK or operated a business in the UK, but retained his UK passport, UK pension account, UK email address, and immediate and extended family in the UK. Importantly, the court emphasised the debtor’s investor visa documentation, which contained a sworn statement that he fully intended to return to Great Britain upon the expiration of his visa term. Accordingly, the court held that the UK was the debtor’s habitual residence and COMI, and granted recognition of the debtor’s UK insolvency proceeding. Practitioners must be aware of the uncertainty in the case law with respect to the operative date for the determination of an individual debtor’s COMI or establishment, and the lack of uniformity presently employed by US courts in assessing an individual debtor’s habitual residence. Most importantly, practitioners must be prepared to make factual assessments of the debtor’s circumstances and face challenges presented by such factors required to prove an individual debtor’s habitual residence. References Guide to Enactment and Interpretation of the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency (2013 revision), section 141. In re Richardson, Case No. 9:14-bk-04875-FMD, DE 120 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1 June 2016). In re Loy, 380 B.R. 154 (Bankr. E.D. Va. 2007). In re Ran, 607 F.3d 1017 (5th Cir. 2010). In re Kemsley, 489 B.R. 346 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2012). United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency, 10, U.N. Gen. Assembly, UNCITRAL 30th Sess., U.N. Doc. A/CN.9/442 (1997), is available at their website . Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open 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.. Firm News Apr 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit...

Sequor Law announces partners Leyza B. Florin and Fernando Menendez joining the firm, marking significant growth for the firm founded just a year ago. Meet Our Newest Partners Open Firm News Open June 4, 2018 1 minute read Sequor Law Leyza B. Florin and Fernando Menendez have joined the Sequor Law team as partners, representing a significant expansion for the firm, founded just one year ago.  “The firm not only gains two outstanding lawyers with years of experience in insolvency, restructuring and commercial litigation, but their bilingual and multicultural heritage will add to the growth of our market leadership in international asset recovery and cross-border insolvency.” -- Ed Davis , Sequor Law Founding Shareholder Leyza B. Florin Leyza will focus her practice on a wide range of litigation and insolvency matters, including debt restructuring and representation of creditors, with special emphasis on complex business bankruptcy and commercial litigation matters. She is also a Florida Supreme Court Certified Civil Mediator. Fernando Menendez Fernando will focus his practice on a broad range of insolvency-related matters, including complex workouts, bankruptcy litigation involving preferences, fraudulent transfers, and complex contested matters, creditors’ rights and remedies, as well as the representation of foreign and domestic court-appointed trustees. Leyza remarked, “We are so pleased to be able to bring our practice to Sequor Law, a highly acclaimed international firm. We have known several of the lawyers at Sequor Law professionally for years and have long admired their practice. We have shared values and a common vision to render world-class legal services from a highly specialized and client-focused platform.” Greg Grossman , a Sequor Law founding Shareholder added: “Leyza and Fernando’s work ethic, tenacity and thought leadership epitomize the motto of Sequor Law: Relentless. Global. Pursuit.” We invite you to learn more about our two newest additions, as well as our entire Sequor Law team, at SequorLaw.com . Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open 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.. Firm News Apr 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit...