2020 Email From Office of Chief Counsel in re: Litigation Involving Blocked Property

Date issued: Jan. 03 2020

You've hit a wall. Sign in if you have an account, learn more about TURBOFAC and subscription options, or purchase access to the text of the document on this page, the native .pdf file, and the associated TURBOFAC original commentary.
TURBOFAC is a module of the compliance platform OverRuled. To learn more about OverRuled, visit www.overruled.com.

TURBOFAC Commentary (212 words)

Notes:

1) The question addressed here was whether a non-sanctioned person (here a non-U.S. person) required a specific license to intervene in various U.S. court proceedings to prevent the attachment (pursuant to TRIA) by third parties of blocked property. See native PDF. It is clear that a potential judgment creditor does not require a specific license to pursue the attachment of blocked property, i.e. seek a determination from a court as to whether the conditions for attachment have been satisfied (this is true whether or not the legal basis for the attachment would be TRIA). See Case No. FNK-2013-299796. The same (implicitly) goes for the provision of legal services by U.S. persons in connection with the pursuant of attachments

However, there has been no clear guidance of which we are aware that addresses the provision of legal services...