Search this site

The Southern District of Florida bankruptcy court adopted the Judicial Insolvency Network’s Chapter 15 cooperation guidelines to improve cross-border insolvency communication. SDFL Adopts Guidelines For Cooperation On Int’l Bankruptcies Open In the News Open February 16, 2018 3 minutes read Sequor Law By Carolina Bolado The Southern District of Florida’s bankruptcy court has adopted guidelines for communication and cooperation between courts in cross-border insolvency matters that practitioners say will help courts efficiently handle the increasing number of Chapter 15 cases filed in the region as its ties to Latin America continue to strengthen. In an order issued Feb. 1, Chief Judge Laurel Myerson Isicoff said the court would adopt the Judicial Insolvency Network’s guidelines for cooperation on Chapter 15 bankruptcies, making the district the third, after Delaware and the Southern District of New York, to implement the toolkit for cross-border cooperation. “Together with the District of Delaware and the Southern District of New York, we have the vast majority of the Chapter 15 cases filed in the country, so it makes sense that at least in our jurisdictions that we would adopt these guidelines,” Judge Isicoff said. The guidelines, created by JIN in late 2016, are meant to improve communication and cooperation between courts handling parallel bankruptcy proceedings. Courts that adopt the guidelines agree to accept orders made in proceedings in other jurisdictions, barring an objection by one of the parties. The guidelines also provide frameworks for holding joint hearings and for judge-to-jfrom nowudge communication. Greg Grossman of Sequor Law , which files a large percentage of the Chapter 15 cases in the Southern District of Florida, called the guidelines a “really large toolkit.” “In some cases, you’re going to need a wrench; some will need a Phillips-head screwdriver, and some will need a hammer,” he said. “This is an opportunity to encourage more direct communication with each other.” Under the guidelines, bankruptcy courts should encourage administrators of estates in parallel proceedings to work together. A bankruptcy judge should also share all orders, judgments, opinions, transcripts of proceedings and other court documents with his or her counterpart in a different jurisdiction, according to the guidelines. The guidelines also lay out procedures for communications between courts by requiring notice of any judge-to-judge communication and allowing the parties to be present. In addition, they allow courts to authorize a party in a foreign proceeding to appear and be heard on a specific matter without making the party subject to that court’s jurisdiction for any other purpose. After the guidelines were drafted, Singapore and the District of Delaware were the first jurisdictions to adopt them in early February 2017. The Southern District of Florida followed shortly thereafter, as did Bermuda, England, Wales and the British Virgin Islands. New South Wales in Australia agreed to the guidelines in September. So far, the Southern District of Florida averages about two Chapter 15 cases per month, but it’s a number that is growing as Miami in particular deepens its ties with Latin America, according to Grossman. This move by the Southern District of Florida’s bankruptcy court could encourage courts in Latin America to get on board, he said. “Nobody in Latin America has passed it, but it’s coming,” he said. “It took them awhile to get Chapter 15, so baby steps.” Already they appear to be moving in that direction. Two bankruptcy judges in Latin America, one in Sao Paulo, Brazil, and another in Buenos Aires, Argentina, joined JIN, though Grossman said it is not clear whether they have adopted the guidelines for cooperation. But the action by the judges marked JIN’s first foray into Latin America. “Our best guess — but we are by no means certain — is that these individual judges would follow the guidelines in their own cases, but they are not able to have their courts adopt the guidelines,” Grossman said. Judge Isicoff said that these communication and coordination issues have not come up in any Chapter 15 cases she has overseen, and her fellow judges on the bench reported no problems so far when they sat down to discuss whether to adopt the guidelines. But she said that didn’t mean it didn’t make sense for the court to get on board. “Just because something hasn’t come up yet doesn’t mean it won’t come up, especially as more and more Chapter 15 cases get filed,” Judge Isicoff said. “We just felt it makes sense for us to be consistent with the Southern District of New York and the District of Delaware.” To view full article, click here. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight Aug 17, 2026 3 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Carolina M. Rosso “Pour faire de grandes choses, il ne faut pas être un si grand génie... Firm News Jun 23, 2026 3 minutes Sequor Law Welcomes Attorney Carolina M. Rosso to Its Expanding International Litigation and Asset Recovery Team Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Carolina M. Rosso has joined the firm as an Attorney. Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more..

A forum article examining how managers and allies can better support underrepresented attorneys in law firms, featuring insights from Sequor Law's Gregory Grossman. Forum: The critical role of managers and allies in the legal profession Open In the News Open June 23, 2021 4 minutes read Sequor Law In the corporate world, managers of diverse employees have significant influence over their employees’ success and play a major role in retaining and developing those employees. While the same is true in the legal industry, it is harder to determine who is the diverse attorney’s manager. Most associates work with a variety of partners, even at smaller law firms, so it is more difficult to say which partner wears the label of “manager.” Unfortunately, this often means that it becomes less clear who is responsible for developing, supporting and promoting diverse attorneys. However, it is the underrepresented – people of color, women, LGBTQ+ persons, individuals with disabilities and veterans – who need effective advocates in the workplace beyond their manager. And these advocates are the courageous allies in society that work to create more equitable and inclusive experiences and workplaces. All law firms have their own distinct structure, and this structure determines who is responsible for guiding a diverse associate on their path to success. Obviously, the partner who assigns work should be the first advocate for the attorney’s career. Second, practice area leaders (or similar positions) may not interact with diverse attorneys regularly but are responsible for the overall success of all the attorneys under their purview. In some cases, firms also have a person in an administrative role who oversees work assignments, evaluations and feedback – another good candidate to be an advocate. And finally, formal and informal mentors play a role. In the legal world, all the above-mentioned leaders should act as “manager” in an effort to positively impact diverse associates’ career trajectories and enhance the firm’s retention. Issues arise, however, when none, or only one, of these people step up and accept the responsibility. Ensuring that diverse attorneys have access to formalized work assignments, professional development opportunities, mentoring programs and sponsorship commitments does not happen without a concerted effort. Firm leaders should focus on these four areas to make sure advocacy happens within the firm: Building relationships Wesley Bizzell, senior assistant general counsel of Altria Client Services and president of the National LGBT Bar Association, notes that “time is a challenge,” whether in a corporate law department or a law firm, but that “plain old-fashioned listening” is vital to a manager’s role in supporting diverse attorneys. Creating relationships with diverse attorneys shows the manager is making an investment in attorney careers. The key is to create a “sincere relationship with people because it will pay off in the long term,” says Ronald Jordan, senior principal director at Carter-White & Shaw. “It is an investment.” Providing opportunities It is critical for diverse attorney success that managers be conscious of how and to whom they assign work and the quality of those assignments. “It’s important to be thoughtful about high-profile work across the team,” explains Bonnie Lau, partner at Morrison & Foerster and alumni chair of the Leadership Council on Legal Diversity. “It is common knowledge that partners tend to rely on their choice colleagues, which often excludes underrepresented diverse attorneys.” Ensuring a pipeline of work Developing key legal competencies is vital for all attorneys, and work assignments are the primary mechanism in how attorneys gain that skill and knowledge. No matter who controls the pipeline, “just getting diverse attorneys noticed and valued so that they gain access is what is important,” says Gregory Grossman , partner at Sequor Law. Managers, however defined in a law firm, need to ensure their diverse attorneys get the experience necessary to stay on track at their firms, and there are many ways managers can do this. For example, to ensure the firm’s work was equitably distributed, Jenner & Block piloted a new work assignment process to create “more oversight and insight starting with the new associates,” notes Courtney Carter, Jenner & Block’s director of diversity and inclusion. Promoting allyship An ally is an individual who helps to create work cultures that attract and retain the highest quality attorneys. These allies commit to diversity, equity and inclusion in meaningful and lasting ways to best support the advancement of underrepresented attorneys. An ally also must demonstrate courage and agree to risk their political capital for underrepresented attorneys. This includes “offering to introduce colleagues from underrepresented groups to influential people within your network,” says Keyonn Pope, partner at Reed Smith. Being an ally What does it mean to be an ally within a legal organization? Senior attorneys who hold positions of influence often act as allies to those with less access, taking responsibility for implementing changes that will enable underrepresented attorneys’ success. “Being an ally, or accomplice, requires a commitment to use one’s personal and professional platform to create positive change,” says Daniel L. (D.L.) Morriss, diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) partner at Hinshaw & Culbertson. Indeed, an ally can perform powerful acts such as recommending newer colleagues for high-profile work, stretch assignments and learning opportunities. Allies can also demonstrate support by creating a safe space for attorneys to be their authentic selves, normalizing mental health and wellness issues, and suggesting diverse attorneys to be speakers or panelists. “There are people who support DEI and want to be allies,” explains Taylor Wilson, managing partner of Haynes and Boone, adding it’s important to “empower them to use their voices and privilege to better advocate for change.” Allies also seek to create systemic change within the organization, not just remove barriers for specific underrepresented attorneys. This can be done through resource funding, salary review, inclusive hiring practices, inclusive employee benefit plans, nursing rooms, wellness rooms, prayer rooms, venue accessibility and all-gender restrooms. Ultimately, allies must give honest and constructive feedback and overcome fears that the receiver will not accept the feedback. Studies have found that African American lawyers receive extra scrutiny from supervising attorneys, which can lead to poor performance reviews, lower bonuses, less visible assignments and job loss. The feedback should be specific. When pinpointing something negative, offer assistance and highlight ways and resources to improve. The key is to tie all feedback to business goals. In the legal field, diversity of thought and perspective are critical to servicing clients at the highest level. Managers and allies will help law firms move the needle forward in creating an environment in which all underrepresented communities are afforded equal access to quality work and opportunities. Remember, the ultimate goal of a diverse workforce is to promote a stronger cross section of perspectives, experiences and insights to solve clients’ legal challenges. This should be the goal of every attorney and law firm leader. To see the original article, click here. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight 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 highlights the U.S. government's seizure and repatriation of 95 artworks tied to Banco Santos founder Edemar Cid Ferreira's money laundering scheme. US Government Repatriates 95 Artworks Linked to Disgraced Brazilian Financier Open In the News Open October 11, 2017 3 minutes read Sequor Law The blue-chip collection was part of a massive money laundering scheme. By Henri Neuendorf The United States has seized and returned 95 artworks valued in the tens of millions of dollars that once belonged to the disgraced Brazilian banker Edemar Cid Ferreira. The founder and former president of Banco Santos, Ferreira was convicted of money laundering and crimes against the national financial system in 2006 and is currently appealing against a 21-year prison sentence. During his tenure as president of Banco Santos, Ferreira bought dozens of works by blue-chip names including Jean-Michel Basquiat , Louise Bourgeois , Francis Picabia , Henry Moore , and Anish Kapoor . In 2006, a Brazilian court found that he bought the works with illegally obtained funds from Banco Santos and ruled that they should be seized and used to repay the bank’s creditors. But when Brazilian officials searched Ferreira’s home, storage facility, and offices in 2006, they discovered that much of the collection was missing. They have been on the hunt for them ever since. The collection was illegally smuggled out of Brazil between November 2004 and March 2005, according to authorities. The works were shipped through the US with false documentation, inaccurate valuations, and fabricated titles to locations in Switzerland, France, the Netherlands, and the UK. (For example, when the work by Basquiat, which has been appraised at $8 million, was sent to a New York storage facility from the Netherlands, the shipping invoice stated it was worth only $100.) Over the next 11 years, the US worked with Interpol and governments across Europe to locate the star-studded collection. Dutch authorities seized three crates containing 85 of the missing artworks from a storage facility and turned them over to US authorities; a UK-based auction house voluntarily handed over seven artworks to US law enforcement; the underwriters of an insurance policy to a company controlled by Ferreira handed over a painting by Rufino Tamayo ; and an unnamed New York gallery reached a settlement to jointly sell a painting by Helen Frankenthaler with the Brazilian judicial administrator in a deal approved in March 2017. Most recently, a Henry Moore statue was seized by French authorities from a storage facility and handed over to US authorities this summer. Why did it take so long to find and return the works? According to Arnoldo B. Lacayo of Sequor Law, one of the attorneys representing the Brazilian Judicial Administrator, the repatriation process was drawn out because the art was subject to complex criminal and bankruptcy cases in Brazil and the US. “The recovery process… has taken time but represents an important success on behalf of the many creditors of the Estate of Banco Santos who were hurt as a result of the illicit activity which resulted in the bank’s demise,” he says. “In short, while some of the art left Brazil as long ago as 2004, the criminal, bankruptcy and forfeiture cases only came later.” The latest repatriation comes after the US attorney returned five works —paintings by Jean-Michel Basquiat, Roy Lichtenstein , Joaquin Torres Garcia, Serge Poliakoff , and a Roman sculpture—valued at a combined $20–30 million to Brazil in June 2015. “These works were used to mask an audacious criminal scheme by Edemar Cid Ferreira,” acting Manhattan US attorney Joon H. Kim says in a statement . Thanks to efforts of the US attorney’s office and Homeland Security Investigations, “these treasured pieces will be returned to their rightful owner, the bankruptcy estate of Ferreira’s insolvent Banco Santos.” Click to view full article. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight 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 note synthesizes major U.S. salvage cases to guide maritime treasure recovery disputes involving cultural property and lost treasure. Salvage at Your Own Peril: A Common Law Approach to Maritime Treasure Recovery Open Legal Insights Open October 1, 2014 1 minute read Sequor Law This note will form a prescriptive guide for future disputes based on significant cases brought in American courts regarding the salvage of wrecks containing cultural property and lost treasure. Open link here Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight Aug 17, 2026 3 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Carolina M. Rosso “Pour faire de grandes choses, il ne faut pas être un si grand génie... Firm News Jun 23, 2026 3 minutes Sequor Law Welcomes Attorney Carolina M. Rosso to Its Expanding International Litigation and Asset Recovery Team Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Carolina M. Rosso has joined the firm as an Attorney. Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more..

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

Sequor Law sponsors the IWIRC Annual Fall Conference in Orlando, with Shareholder Leyza B. Florin and Counsel Nyana Miller championing women's leadership in the insolvency profession. Sequor Law Empowers Women to Lead Open Events & Speaking Open October 21, 2022 1 minute read Sequor Law Shareholder Leyza B. Florin and Counsel Nyana Miller showed what it means to Be a Lead her while they attended the IWIRC Annual Fall Conference in Orlando, Florida. As a longtime supporter of this network, Sequor Law was an event sponsor, gifting all attendees with branded pouches empowering women to be leaders. 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 Greg Grossman and Francis Curiel analyze the Eleventh Circuit's broad discovery ruling under Section 1782 in support of foreign bankruptcy proceedings, comparing it to Chapter 15. Eleventh Circuit Gives Green Light to Broad Discovery in Aid of Foreign Bankruptcies Open Legal Insights Open October 21, 2020 5 minutes read Sequor Law By Greg Grossman and Francis Curiel , Miami The Eleventh Circuit recently affirmed a district court’s broad grant of discovery for use in five foreign bankruptcy proceedings to which the discovery applicant was a creditor-party. This article will briefly examine how the (relaxed) standard set forth by this Section 1782 proceeding compares to the (less relaxed) standard set forth by two notable Chapter 15 cases. In re Petroforte, by now a well-known Chapter 15 case, involved the liquidation of one of Brazil’s largest gas and ethanol distributors. During the liquidation, the Brazilian trustee found evidence of fraudulent transfers made to several entities, which led the Brazilian court to extend the bankruptcy case to include the transferees. The Brazilian trustee commenced a Chapter 15 proceeding in the Southern District of Florida to seek discovery to assist the Brazilian liquidation. The discovery targets objected, arguing that the subpoenas sought broad financial information about the non-debtor targets that exceeded the limits of discovery under Section 1521(a)(4) and Rule 2004. When the court interpreted the scope of “debtor” under Section 1521(a)(4), it held, in part, that the entities that were subject to the Brazilian bankruptcy extension order were “debtors subject to Section 1521’s discovery powers; however, with regard to any third parties who were not subject to the extension order, the trustee was entitled to broad discovery only when the debtor was a majority stockholder in the non-debtor discovery target. In re SAM likewise dealt with a Chapter 15 proceeding stemming from a Brazilian bankruptcy, wherein the debtor concealed corporate interests by transferring property to family members. The foreign representative sought documents relating to non-debtors who the foreign representative alleged were relevant to his investigation and potential recovery of assets of the foreign estate. The court focused on whether the foreign representative exceeded the proper scope of Rule 2004 discovery. It found that the foreign representative was entitled to discovery relating to (1) the transferees and (2) the non-debtor corporate entities in which the debtor had a majority interest or in those entities already found by the Brazilian courts to have participated in the debtor’s asset concealment scheme. The foreign representative was not entitled to discovery relating to the non-debtor entities whose connections to the debtor had not yet been established in the Brazilian courts. The court further noted that the foreign representative’s inquiries of non-debtors were to be narrowly tailored. Notably, courts have analogized discovery under Chapter 15 with discovery under 28 U.S.C. § 1782. An incongruity may now exist when comparing Petroforte and In re SAM to the Eleventh Circuit’s recent case, In re Victoria. In March 2018, Victoria, LLC (Victoria) filed a § 1782 application in the Southern District of Florida, seeking discovery for use in five pending Russian bankruptcy proceedings to which Victoria was a creditor. The bankruptcy proceedings pertained to either (1) Iliya Likhtenfeld (the Debtor) or (2) his Russian companies. Victoria planned to object to the dischargeability of debt, but first needed proof that the Debtor failed to disclose his U.S. assets in the Russian bankruptcies. To do so, Victoria requested testimony and documents relating to corporate governance, banking, financing, money transfers, business transactions, accounting practices, and the like, from (1) the Debtor; (2) Florida banks with which the Debtor did business; (3) Florida entities that the Debtor allegedly owned or was affiliated with; and (4) individuals affiliated with the Florida entities. To support the existence of these affiliations, Victoria submitted Sunbiz corporate records. Some of these records showed that a woman—who lived at the same address as the Debtor—acted as (either current or former) manager and registered agent of two of the target Florida entities. Notably, the Debtor’s name appeared nowhere on the corporate records of these two Florida entities. Discovery was nonetheless granted for use in the Russian bankruptcies. The shared residence between the Debtor and the manager of these entities proved connection enough. Moreover, in support of its allegations that the subpoena targets were “closely related” to the Debtor, and that the targets “should have documents and knowledge of assets tied to the Russian [bankruptcies],” Victoria created and submitted a chart showing that many of the Florida entities shared the same address, principals, and registered agents. The entities were thus alleged to be interrelated to each other, although not all directly related to the Debtor himself. Victoria also submitted two noteworthy declarations in support of its Section 1782 application. The first declarant alleged “upon information and belief” that the Debtor had (1) caused his Russian companies to enter loan agreements with no intention of repaying; (2) failed to repay the borrowed money; and (3) transferred the borrowed money directly or indirectly to his family members or trusted representatives. Ultimately, the declarant “believed” that the borrowed funds found their way into the United States and were used, in part, to support the Debtor’s luxurious lifestyle in Florida. Neither the declarant nor Victoria submitted any other evidence to support these allegations or the connection between the borrowed funds and the Florida corporations. The second declarant stated that the Debtor had not disclosed any of his U.S. assets to the Russian bankruptcy court even though, “based on the [Sunbiz corporate records],” the Debtor owned and/or held officer positions in several Florida entities. Despite the tenuous connections between the Debtor and some subpoena targets, the court granted the broad financial discovery request with few limitations. The aforementioned evidence (or lack thereof) was enough for this grant of discovery to survive through the Eleventh Circuit, which upheld the district court’s ruling. The disconnect between the above cases poses a noteworthy question—is the Petroforte limitation too narrow in light of the In re Victoria grant of discovery? Victoria, as a creditor seeking discovery assistance for use in foreign bankruptcy proceedings, was granted wide-ranging discovery relating to (1) the Debtor; (2) the Debtor’s banks; (3) non-debtor associates; and (4) non-debtor entities, some of which showed little to no relation to the Debtor besides a shared address with the entities’ manager. The court did not inquire into the Debtor’s ownership interests (or transfer thereof). Nor did it probe into the foreign courts’ findings. Rather, the grant of discovery was based largely on uncorroborated beliefs and bare allegations. More so, it was based on reasonable suspicion that these target individuals and non-debtor entities were involved in the Debtor’s transfer of assets to the detriment of his creditors. In re Victoria has introduced a more relaxed standard that loosens the restrictions placed on discovery requests for use in foreign bankruptcies. In light of this recent development, perhaps it is time to reassess the scope of discovery in Chapter 15 cases, too. Click here to read the original PDF . 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 March 2019 wins include a $22M civil theft judgment against a fraudulent Curacao scheme, a Chapter 15 revenue rule victory, and a successful appellate defense for First Citizens Bank. Recent Wins – March 2019 Open Case Results Open February 28, 2019 2 minutes read Sequor Law Sequor Law founding shareholder, Ed Davis , and attorney Nyana Miller , together with other members of the Sequor Law team, recently secured a $22 million civil theft judgment for a South American finance company. The client had lost $8.6 million to the thief, who attempted to hide behind a complex scheme involving a Curacao investment fund, the fund’s professional managers, several brokers, and a corporate entity that received the moneys as custodian for another entity. After years of litigation (including an appeal relating to service of process that was heard by the Venezuelan Supreme Court), the trial court found the corporate custodian and the individual who controlled that company liable for unjust enrichment, conversion, fraud and civil theft. Greg Grossman and Nyana Miller faced an issue of first impression regarding the revenue rule and Chapter 15 of the US Bankruptcy Code. The revenue rule is the common law principle that one sovereign does not collect or enforce the taxes of another (absent an exception, such as a tax treaty). In a cross border bankruptcy case where the largest creditor is the foreign tax agency and the debtor argues that the bankruptcy was a means of enforcing foreign tax claims, Sequor defeated a motion to dismiss the Chapter 15 case. Judge Delano of the US Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Florida held that a court in a chapter 15 case does not administer claims and therefore recognition of a foreign proceeding cannot violate the revenue rule. The Fourth District Court of Appeals affirmed a final judgment entered in favor of First Citizens Bank & Trust Company, N.A., represented by Greg Grossman and Dan Coyle of Sequor Law. The Court rejected the appellants’ arguments that causes of action against the borrowers and guarantors for breach of note and breach of guarantees could not have been assigned by the FDIC, on behalf of Sun American Bank, to First Citizens after Sun American Bank had obtained a final judgment of foreclosure. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight Aug 17, 2026 3 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Carolina M. Rosso “Pour faire de grandes choses, il ne faut pas être un si grand génie... Firm News Jun 23, 2026 3 minutes Sequor Law Welcomes Attorney Carolina M. Rosso to Its Expanding International Litigation and Asset Recovery Team Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Carolina M. Rosso has joined the firm as an Attorney. Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more..

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

The FBI launches an international corruption squad in Miami targeting South American bribery and money laundering, as federal cases involving illicit foreign funds grow in South Florida. FBI has new Miami squad to fight international corruption Open In the News Open March 11, 2019 4 minutes read Sequor Law By David Lyons For many South Floridians, it’s no secret that the place they call home is a longtime haven for illicit drug money or cash stolen from foreign governments. So it should come as no surprise that the FBI is now setting up an international corruption squad office in Miami. The squad, scheduled to start its work this month, will be focusing on South America. Agents will be out to bust white-collar criminals who bribe foreign public officials and then launder the proceeds through the purchase of local real estate or fancy boats. The squad, the fourth one to be established nationally, will be staffed by senior FBI agents, forensic accountants and prosecutors and investigators who are experienced chasing white-collar criminals and public corruption. The bureau currently operates squads in New York, Washington, D.C., and Los Angeles. Between 2016 and 2018, according to The Associated Press, prosecutors have won 34 convictions in cases brought by the international unit. ‘It’s about time’ There’s plenty of demand for a dedicated effort to investigate the region’s link to corruption in Latin America, say former U.S. attorneys for South Florida. “My first reaction is it’s about time,” said Marcos Jimenez, who served between 2002 and 2005. “The FBI should have done this years ago.” “South Florida has been the corruption capital of Latin America that entire time, and they haven’t dedicated sufficient resources to it,” said Jimenez, a commercial litigator based in Coral Gables. That was mainly because the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington diverted resources to counterterrorism work. ‘Follow the money’ A typical case pattern is for people who receive bribes to salt their money away in South Florida real estate. Jimenez surmised that the government has received an uptick in leads from a reporting program operated by the U.S. Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network. It requires title insurers to report the identities of people who buy residential real estate valued at $300,000 or more. South Florida is one of eight regions subjected to a geographic targeting order designed to flag money laundering through real-estate deals. “It’s the same old rule that has never changed, which is follow the money,” Jimenez said. Wifredo Ferrer, who was U.S. attorney between 2010 and 2017, said that increasingly, he has seen U.S. law enforcement partnering with counterparts in Brazil, Argentina, Peru and Mexico, nations that are all cracking down on corruption. And then there is Venezuela, whose well-connected officials and businessmen have become rich as the socialist government of Nicolas Maduro has edged toward collapse. American sanctions against corrupt Venezuelan officials have reportedly prompted the U.S. Treasury to freeze billions under the control of military officers and others with government ties, including $500 million in assets belonging to a former vice president, Tarak El Aissami. “In Venezuela there is such a focus right now by the U.S. government in making sure they bring to justice those who have laundered money stolen from the country,” said Ferrer, who is executive partner of the Miami office of Holland & Knight. Bringing indictments South Florida’s federal courts have been the scene of indictments and guilty pleas involving defendants who handled illicit Venezuelan money, with the cases led by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement ’s Homeland Security Investigations. Last August, Matthias Krull, a German-born managing director of a Swiss bank in Panama, pleaded guilty in Miami to a single money laundering count and admitted laundering embezzled funds from PDVSA, the state oil company, for relatives of an unnamed Venezuelan government official. And last November, Alejandro Andrade Cedeno, a former Venezuelan national treasurer residing in Wellington, was sentenced to 10 years for a money laundering conspiracy involving more than $1 billion in bribes, according to the U.S. attorney’s office in Miami. Ferrer asserted that throughout much of the hemisphere, Latin Americans are weary of corruption and yearn for local authorities to curtail it. “There is an increase in public outcries,” he said. “There have been marches in certain countries. Citizens don’t want to keep having to suffer the negative effects of corruption. There is a real will and desire in these countries to have this focus.” A special investigative squad for Miami makes sense to private lawyers who help clients recover stolen or missing assets and advise them on compliance laws. South Florida, according to one, is not only a convenient place to hide money, it is a place to make arrangements to cut bribery deals in other countries. “People just don’t call up and say, ‘Can I pay you a bribe?’” said Edward Davis , of Sequor Law in Miami. “There is a negotiation process. It’s common to have a place where they meet and talk things through. If you’re a European manufacturer trying to get a contract, the last thing you want to do is to be seen talking to an official in that country.” The Miami squad will work with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida, and the Miami regional office of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the FBI said. Neither the FBI in Washington nor the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida responded to follow- up questions to the announcement. The existing squads work in conjunction with the Department of Justice’s fraud and money laundering asset forfeiture sections, and report directly to the department in Washington. “The squads routinely partner with foreign law enforcement and FBI legal attache offices … to combat international corruption matters,” the FBI said in a statement. This story has been corrected to reflect that the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations, not the FBI, led the cases involving money laundering schemes related to Venezuela. 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 earns Chambers USA 2019 recognition in Bankruptcy and Restructuring, with Leyza Blanco and Gregory Grossman ranked and the firm shortlisted for Diversity & Inclusion honors. Sequor Law Recognized by Chambers USA 2019 Open Awards & Recognition Open May 3, 2019 1 minute read Sequor Law We are honored to announce that Sequor Law has received the prestigious Chambers USA 2019 “Recognized Practitioner” designation among Florida law firms in Bankruptcy/Restructuring. Additionally, the firm has been shortlisted at the Chambers Diversity & Inclusion Awards: USA 2019 as “Most Inclusive Firm for Minority Lawyers”. The following Sequor Law attorneys are included in Chambers USA 2019 guide: Leyza Blanco Band 2, Bankruptcy/Restructuring Gregory Grossman Band 3, Bankruptcy/Restructuring Chambers is the authoritative guide to the world's leading lawyers, with rankings based on exhaustive research, including confidential interviews with clients and attorneys. We warmly thank our clients for their trust and confidence, which have driven these recognitions. 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..

Rolling Stone’s 2018 feature on the ‘kill list’ case put Tara J. Plochocki’s fight for a citizen’s due process rights before a national audience. How to Survive America’s Kill List Open In the News Open July 19, 2018 2 minutes read Sequor Law When *Rolling Stone* gave a single federal lawsuit the full weight of a long-form investigative feature, it made a quiet argument: the question of whether a citizen can be killed without a hearing belongs to the public, not only to lawyers and judges working behind closed doors. The 2018 piece followed Bilal Abdul Kareem, an American journalist who came to believe his work in Syria had landed him on a secret government targeting list after he survived a series of airstrikes. What might have read as a personal survival story instead opened onto a constitutional question most Americans never face: whether a citizen can even find out that his government has marked him for a drone strike, and whether a court is allowed to review that decision at all. For the press, these are not abstract concerns. Kareem was reporting from a war zone, and the case raised the prospect that journalists doing dangerous, unpopular work could be swept into a lethal designation with no way to contest it. Press freedom and due process rights, usually treated as separate concerns, met in a single file. A magazine known for cultural reporting recognized that and gave it the length the subject demanded, reaching readers who would never open a national security law journal. Carrying that litigation was attorney Tara J. Plochocki , who represented Kareem alongside the human rights organization Reprieve. The matter produced a notable result: a federal judge allowed his due process claim to move forward, refusing to treat the government's targeted killing authority as entirely beyond judicial review. For a citizen who wanted nothing more than a chance to be heard before the use of lethal force, that ruling mattered. The feature is worth reading in full for how it turns a dense legal fight into human terms. Sequor Law points readers to the original reporting: "How to Survive America's Kill List." The case also says something about the kind of work that defines Plochocki's record. She took it on earlier in her career; today she is a Partner at Sequor Law, where she leads the firm's Washington, D.C. office. An ICC FraudNet member admitted to the U.S. Supreme Court and the D.C. and Second Circuits, she built a practice around cross-border asset recovery, financial fraud, and international commercial litigation, and she still litigates at the intersection of constitutional rights, international law, and national security, including amicus briefs on the laws of war. Beyond one man's ordeal, the feature kept a single premise in view: that government power, however secret, still answers to the Constitution — a kill list included. Testing that in court, and a national publication taking the time to explain why it counts, kept a hard question from slipping out of public view. 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..