July 13, 2017

Chris Griner and Anne Salladin quoted in "Why Lawmakers Are Seeking Greater Transparency on Foreign Landlords"

NATIONAL REAL ESTATE INVESTOR | Chris Griner, the co-managing partner of Stroock's Washington, DC office and chair of Stroock's National Security/CFIUS/Compliance Group, and special counsel Anne W. Salladin were quoted in a National Real Estate Investor article that discusses the interest from lawmakers to increase due diligence on real estate transactions executed by foreign owners.


Join Bruce Gallant at PLI's "ERISA 2017: The Evolving World" on July 31 - August 1 in New York, NY

  • Bruce D. Gallant
  • Practising Law Institute
    1177 Avenue of the Americas
    New York, NY 10036

This program will cover an array of topics on ERISA, including the basic regulatory framework, the types of plans covered, the requirements for intended tax treatment, fiduciary responsibilities and other issues relating to the investment of plan assets. In addition, you will learn how to correct errors and about the role of the benefits practitioner in the transactional setting.

Mr. Gallant will offer his perspectives at the panel discussion, "ERISA: Legal Ethis - Outside and In-House Counsel," on the second day of the event.

  • July 24-25, 2017 - ACI’s 29th National Conference on Consumer Finance Class Actions & Litigation
    Read More
  • July 31 - August 1, 2017 - PLI's ERISA 2017: The Evolving World
    Read More
  • October 4, 2017 - Class Action Waivers
    Read More
  • July 5, 2017 | NEW YORK LAW JOURNAL

    "Conflicts of Interest: A Broker on the Board"

    Cooperative and condominium boards are entrusted by apartment owners with responsibility for managing the affairs of their building. Apartment owners generally understand that board members are fiduciaries and expect boards to take actions which are in good faith and in the best interest of the cooperative or condominium community they serve, as a whole, and not for a board member’s personal interest or gain. This column deals with potential board member conflicts of interest, focusing in particular on the broker-as-board-member scenario.

    We examine recent cases involving the business judgment rule, the definition of an interested director and safe harbor provisions that can save an interested director transaction from being successfully challenged. We also review very recently proposed/pending New York State legislation which would require boards to annually disclose to owners all interested director transactions entered into. Last, we provide recommendations on how boards can navigate conflicts of interest and minimize the risk of litigation.


    "Real Estate In the Crosshairs: Congressional Calls to Step Up Scrutiny of Foreign Investment"

    Foreign ownership of property has become a key touchstone in the debate over national security, especially as government agencies and contractors are regular tenants in buildings controlled by non-U.S. investors or owners. Thus, it’s not surprising that the Government Accountability Office recently undertook an independent review of leasing practices of the General Services Administration, to assess how the GSA mitigates risks when it leases space to high-security tenants in foreign-owned buildings where concerns of espionage or influence-peddling could be elevated. A new bill is now before Congress proposing to change the process by which federal leasing agencies, including the GSA, gather information on the actual beneficial owners of foreign-owned real estate.

    Three U.S. Senators are attempting to examine the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States review process and the types of real estate transactions that fall under the committee’s jurisdiction.


    "What Lawyers Can Learn from Poker Players"

    Litigation is often compared to chess. The image is evoked of a lawyer strategically developing evidence and making arguments the same way a chess player moves and sacrifices pieces on a chessboard, to defeat an opponent. But ask any trial lawyer, and he or she will tell you that litigation is nothing like chess. In chess, both players have the same pieces and start from the same squares on the board — in effect, their cases are equally strong. Moreover, in chess, both players have an unobstructed view of the board; in other words, they both possess full knowledge of the facts. In litigation, neither of these fundamental premises is true.

    The better analogy and, more importantly, the better place to turn for useful practice pointers, is poker. In poker, each player starts with the cards as they are dealt; a hand may be good or bad, depending on the luck of the draw.

    Likewise, in litigation, the lawyer is presented with his client’s case, whatever its strengths or weaknesses may be. Almost by definition, the two sides in litigation will not be equally matched at the outset as occurs in chess. In poker, each player’s knowledge is limited; she can see her cards, and any common cards, but not the cards of her opponent. So, too, in litigation, the lawyer’s knowledge is limited to what he can learn from his client or through discovery; he does not know privileged information known only to his adversary. As a result, lawyers, like poker players, in order to win, must constantly make the best decisions they can base on imperfect information.

    So what do winning poker players know that you don’t?