The ruling is a potential boon to judgment creditors in the U.S., including those with judgments against foreign governments or corporations, seeking to locate their debtors' global assets.
In Aldo Vera, Jr. v. The Republic of Cuba. the Second Circuit left standing a March 17, 2015 SDNY ruling declining to reconsider its prior September 10, 2014 order directing Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria, S.A. (BBVA) to comply with an information subpoena issued in connection with Aldo Vera, Jr.'s attempt to enforce a $49 million default judgment against the Republic of Cuba. According a 2008 judgment rendered in Florida, Aldo Vera, Sr., the first Castro regime chief of police of Havana, was executed in Puerto Rico by Cuban government operatives after he fled Cuba and joined the anti-Castro universe. Under a set of exceptions to sovereign immunity covering acts of terror by certain listed countries (including Cuba until recently), judgments in American courts for certain acts can be enforced against Cuban state assets blocked in 22 banks in New York and one in New Jersey.
Since the 2008 judgment, the plaintiff has recovered approximately $6 million from Cuban accounts in the New York branches of both domestic and foreign banks. In litigation in the Second Circuit and the DC Circuit, there have been holdings that limit the plaintiff's enforcement efforts in the US to accounts where either the deposits were by Cuban state entities and then frozen, or the deposits were actual funds that were to be paid to Cuban state entities and were stopped in transit in US accounts. EFTs that were blocked in transit, which is the great bulk of the Cuban assets, have been held to not be Cuban “property” or a “debt” to Cuba in the US, but rather to remain in the country of origin.
A green light to discovery of overseas assets
At issue in the current case is discovery of assets that can be pursued in other jurisdictions. In Koehler v. Bank of Bermuda Ltd., (2009), the New York Court of Appeals held that a judgment creditor who either obtains a New York judgment or domesticates an out-of-state judgment in New York can compel a bank which has a branch in New York to bring specified assets of the judgment debtor held in a branch outside New York into New York for levy. Subsequent cases have held, however, under the Separate Entity rule, that a judgment creditor cannot levy on out of state deposits simply by serving the branch in New York.
What remained open is whether an information subpoena requiring the New York branch of a foreign bank to divulge material on the assets of a foreign judgment debtor held in foreign branches can be enforced. In Vera, as cited by the Second Circuit, the SDNY ruled that "broad post-judgment discovery in aid of execution is the norm in federal and New York State courts" and "New York law entitles judgment creditors to discover all matters relevant to the satisfaction of a judgment." Further, "When corporations receive the benefits of operating in this forum, it is critical that regulators and courts continue to have the power to compel information concerning their activities."
The Second Circuit declined jurisdiction on the discovery issue, finding that it would have jurisdiction only over a "final decision" of the district court, and that BBVA's interlocutory appeal was not in response to a "final decision." In the current case, only a contempt ruling against BBVA for refusing to comply with the discovery order would constitute a "final decision" that could be appealed. The upshot is that any bank that has an office in New York that wants to avoid telling a judgment creditor about foreign assets of a judgment debtor held by that bank will have to subject itself to contempt if it wants to appeal an adverse Federal ruling.
Jeffrey Glen, a shareholder in the Corporate and Commercial Litigation group at Anderson Kill and counsel to plaintiff Aldo Vera, Jr., commented, "It's vital for plaintiffs who obtain judgments against defendants with far-flung assets to be able to discover those assets so they can pursue them wherever they're concentrated. New York law enables such discovery, as federal courts have rightly affirmed in Vera. That's good news for plaintiffs with claims against foreign governments, foreign entities, and powerful individuals, wherever they are based."
Robert Swift of Kohn Swift & Graf, P.C. of Philadelphia is also counsel to Vera.
About Anderson Kill
Anderson Kill practices law in the areas of Insurance Recovery, Commercial Litigation, Environmental Law, Estates, Trusts and Tax Services, Corporate and Securities, Antitrust, Banking and Lending, Bankruptcy and Restructuring, Real Estate and Construction, Foreign Investment Recovery, Public Law, Government Affairs, Employment and Labor Law, Captive Insurance, Intellectual Property, Corporate Tax, Hospitality and Health Reform. Recognized nationwide by Chambers USA for Client Service and Commercial Awareness, and best-known for its work in insurance recovery, the firm represents policyholders only in insurance coverage disputes - with no ties to insurance companies and has no conflicts of interest. Clients include Fortune 1000 companies, small and medium-sized businesses, governmental entities, and nonprofits as well as personal estates. Based in New York City, the firm also has offices in Ventura, CA, Philadelphia, PA, Stamford, CT, Washington, DC and Newark, NJ.