Diaz Reus Newsletter – May 2015
| Diaz Reus Earns Prestigious Ranking From Chambers and Partners |
| Chambers and Partners, a world renowned legal services directory honoring outstanding legal practioners, has selected Diaz Reus and Global Managing Partner, Michael Diaz, Jr. to its 2015 USA Guide as a top litigation firm in Florida. A team of over 150 highly qualified, full-time researchers identified and ranked the best lawyers and law firms in the category based on in-depth, objective research. Diaz, Reus & Targ LLP | Florida Litigation
The firm is known for: Particular strength in marshaling cross-border litigation and arbitration proceedings, especially in relation to Latin America. Noted capability in relation to financial fraud, asset recovery and RICO matters.
Among the firm’s strengths: (Quotes mainly from clients) “They have a unique attentiveness to detail. They are advocates, but also counselors of law and they are amazingly objective about the strengths and weaknesses of their case.”
“There is a consistent standard of writing – it is clean, persuasive, careful, never sloppy, always timely – they are one of the higher-level practices.”
Notable practitioners: Sources regard Michael Diaz as “extremely smart” with an “excellent strategic approach.” He maintains a well-regarded practice encompassing both civil and criminal proceedings, particularly in the area of financial fraud.
Work highlights: Represented 23 auto dealerships in an action brought against an Indian importer of light trucks and SUVs concerning the alleged breach of automobile agreements. The suit includes allegations of fraud, negligent misrepresentation, fraudulent inducement, unjust enrichment and civil conspiracy, and is valued at $80 million.
Acted for Fondo de Protección Social de los Depósitos Bancarios as a joint defendant in a suit brought by a Venezuelan national alleging he was subject to illegal expropriation by the Venezuelan government. The firm successfully moved to dismiss the case due to its being barred by the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act and the Act of State doctrine.
Reference Chambers USA Guide 2015 here >>>
|
| Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act Limits Upheld In Venezuelan Billionaire Mezerhane’s Lawsuit |
| Expatriate Venezuelan billionaire Nelson J. Mezerhane’s attempt to sue his government and FOGADE, the Venezuelan equivalent of the FDIC, in U.S. courts for alleged illegal expropriations has again been turned back, this time by the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. Diaz, Reus & Targ, LLP had successfully argued for dismissal in the district court by pointing out that the facts as alleged by Mezerhane did not show a violation of international law – a requirement under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act’s expropriation exception. “The law is very clear. U.S. Courts cannot tell foreign sovereigns how to treat their own citizens,” said Diaz Reus partner Marta Colomar Garcia representing Fondo de Protección Social de los Depósitos Bancarios (FOGADE). “Venezuela and its agencies are entitled to sovereign immunity because the events alleged by Mr. Mezerhane occurred in Venezuela, where he was a citizen.” |
| Davos Financial Group CEO David Osio Loses Bid to Stop Lawsuit by Ousted Partners |
| Miami-based Davos Financial Group CEO David Osio was dealt another legal blow last month when Florida’s Third District Court of Appeal rejected his efforts to immunize various offshore financial entities from responsibility in a lawsuit filed by former Davos partners. The April 29 ruling rebuffs Osio’s latest attempt to distance himself from the U.S. courts in the 2011 fraud lawsuit brought by former partners Rodrigo Fernandez and Andres Sotillo, represented by Diaz, Reus & Targ LLP.
Fernandez and Sotillo were ousted from a partnership interest in Davos in 2010 when they learned of a number of improper actions that Osio had taken. Osio has also been dogged by allegations of wrongdoing in other jurisdictions.
Several Davos companies moved to dismiss the lawsuit, claiming that they were exclusively foreign and had no contacts with the State of Florida. However, evidence discovered and shown to the trial court proved that all the entities were controlled and directed from Miami.
|