Areas of Concentration

Mr. Floyd’s areas of concentration include:

  • Disputes involving time charters, voyage charters, and long-term contracts of affreightment (COAs)
  • Disputes involving commodities trading agreements for grain, ore, and petroleum products
  • Representation of clients with respect to damaged cargo and claims arising from erroneous inspector certificates of quantity / quality
  • Disputes involving terminal operations
  • Ancillary proceedings to obtain security in the U.S. for claims pending abroad
  • Ancillary proceedings to obtain discovery in the U.S. for proceedings pending abroad
  • Representation of creditors in cross-border insolvency disputes
  • Representation of plaintiffs and defendants with respect to alter ego allegations to pierce corporate veils
  • Counseling clients regarding the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act
  • Analytical statements regarding U.S. maritime law for use in foreign proceedings

Sample Clients

Mr. Floyd has represented:

  • Vessel owners
  • Vessel charterers
  • Commodities buyers and sellers
  • Insurers
  • Terminal operators
  • Hedge funds involved in the maritime industry
  • Law firms

Experience

Mr. Floyd also regularly represents clients in connection with cross-border insolvency proceedings pending pursuant to Chapter 15 of the US Bankruptcy Code and has achieved significant success in that area, including enabling creditors to secure and foreclose on claims against purportedly insolvent entities.

Mr. Floyd also practices in EVW’s First Amendment Litigation practice area. In that respect, he has obtained landmark decisions protecting the free speech rights of persons to safely publish opinions on the internet concerning commercial matters.

Representative Litigation Matters

  • Armada (Singapore) Pte. Ltd. v. Amcol International Corp., 2013 WL 5781845 (N.D.Ill 2013) (Bucklo, J.) – Successfully defeated three separate motions to dismiss in matter where our client was pursuing very large fraudulent transfer and RICO claims against various defendants.
  • Ravenna Tankers Pte., SRL v. Omni Ships Pte. Ltd., CIV.A. 13-127, 2013 WL 2153544 (E.DLa. 2013) – Successfully argued that funds which had been deposited into a court’s registry as substitute security for the seizure (by maritime attachment under Supplemental Rule B) of one vessel were subject to a maritime lien against sub-hire owed for the use of a second vessel such that the deposited funds were subject to maritime arrest under Supplemental Rule C.
  • Deer Consumer Products, Inc. v. Little Group, Case No. 650823 / 2011 (Sup. Ct. N.Y. Co. 2012) (Edmead, J.) – Defended multiple parties against libel claims brought by a publicly traded company which alleged internet publications defamed plaintiff, impacting its stock price. This decision dismissed defamation claims on the ground that the challenged statements constituted constitutionally protected opinion).
  • Ashapura Minechem Ltd., Bankr. Case No. 11-14668 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2012 (Peck, J.) – Represented a creditor (for which EVW obtained a U.S. judgment of approximately $70 million) in connection with its opposition to the continued U.S. recognition of an Indian insolvency proceeding. The court ordered the foreign debtor to post security for EVW’s client’s claims and to take necessary steps to enable it to fully participate in the purported Indian insolvency proceedings. The debtor failed to comply and the Court terminated U.S. recognition of the foreign proceedings and dismissed the Chapter 15 bankruptcy case. This was the first Chapter 15 case of its kind resulting in dismissal on “changed circumstances” grounds.
  • Armada (Singapore) Pte. Ltd. v. Ashapura Minechem Ltd., 837 F.Supp.2d 880 (N.D.Ill 2011) (Bucklo, J.) – Represented a plaintiff in connection with maritime attachment proceedings. A garnishee contended the attached property (a substantial sum of money due in connection with a securities transaction) was owed to an individual rather than to the named defendant. The Court held a bench trial and ruled in EVW’s client’s favor, holding that the disputed funds were owed to defendant. The Court ordered the garnishee to pay the concerned stock sale proceeds to EVW’s client.
  • Hawknet Limited v. Overseas Shipping Agencies, Case No. 07-5912 (S.D.N.Y. 2009), aff’d, 590 F.3d 87 (2d Cir. 2009) – Counsel to defendant alleged to be the alter ego of a Persian Gulf-based shipping group. At trial, defense counsel defeated plaintiff’s alter ego allegations and the court dismissed claims against EVW’s client. Plaintiff was again defeated on appeal to the Second Circuit.

Admissions

  • State of New York
  • State of New Jersey
  • United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
  • United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York
  • United States District Court for the District of New Jersey
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Publications and Presentations

Education and Related Experience

  • Fordham Law School (J.D.), 2004
  • U.S. Naval Academy, 1996
  • Following graduation from the U.S. Naval Academy, Mr. Floyd was commissioned as an officer in the U.S. Marine Corps in which he has served as both an infantry officer and as an artillery officer. Mr. Floyd made multiple overseas deployments and continues to serve in the reserves with the rank of Lieutenant Colonel.