Case Is Test of Investors’ Ability to Recoup Losses in Wake of Accounting Questions
BY MICHAEL RAPOPORT
The court-appointed receiver empowered to seize the assets of a U.S.-traded Chinese company facing accounting questions has chalked up his first successes
BY IRWIN KISHNER AND DANIEL A. ETNA, HERRICK FEINSTEIN LLP
A Delaware Court of Chancery decision highlights the importance of complying with the books and records requirements imposed by Section 220 of the Delaware General Corporation Law. At issue was a Delaware corporation operating in China which failed to comply with a December 2012 default judgment ordering it to produce corporate books and records in Delaware pursuant to Section 220. The corporation was only willing to make its books and records available for inspection at its principal office in China. The court held the corporation in contempt of court and ordered the corporation to provide an extremely broad list of documents, including detailed financial and strategic information, for review in Delaware. The court, as a sign of its displeasure with the corporation’s disregard of Section 220, further granted the aggrieved stockholder a right to put his shares back to the corporation at a price based on book value and appointed a receiver [Robert Seiden] for the corporation’s assets to enforce the court’s orders. . .
BY KAJA WHITEHOUSE
US Marshals raided a Brooklyn home this week, looking for books and records of a China-based cable company accused of stiffing its shareholders, The Post has learned
“We are leaving no stone unturned,” said Rob Seiden, the receiver who has been tasked with locating ZST’s assets for Deutsch
With the increasing use of arbitration as an alternative to full-blown litigation, the risk of a conflict of interest by an individual arbitrator has grown, too.
BY ROBERT W. SEIDEN
With the increasing use of arbitration as an alternative to full-blown litigation, the risk of a conflict of interest by an individual arbitrator has grown. This risk can be mitigated significantly by the use of comprehensive and exhaustive investigative due diligence, background checks, and investigative link analysis to determine the connections between an arbitrator and one of the parties or counsel in the arbitration. This investigation will invariably help to weed out connections or a hidden conflict that might taint the fairness of the proceeding or raise the appearance of bias