Photo of David Picon

David Picon

Subscribe to David Picon's Posts

David A. Picon is a seasoned litigator who has tried dozens of cases in various tribunals for financial services firms and public and private companies. David represents clients in complex commercial disputes in a wide range of matters, including complex securities issues, commodities and derivatives-related disputes, fraudulent transfer actions, alleged Ponzi schemes, and contract and employment-related disputes.

A member of the Commercial Litigation and Securities Litigation practices, David appears in numerous judicial and administrative forums in investigations brought by the SEC, FINRA and other regulatory bodies for financial services firms. He also has broad experience in large chapter 11 cases, representing debtors, as well as creditors and statutory committees. Additionally, David has substantial counseling experience in general commercial disputes.

David is a frequent speaker on matters related to the financial services industry and the co-author of “Broker-Dealer Litigation and Arbitration,” Chapter 86 of the multi-volume treatise, Commercial Litigation in New York State Courts.

David also serves on the boards of The Harlem School of the Arts and JVS of Metrowest.

David is the chair of the Firm’s Billing and Collections Committee, and a member of the Firm’s Hiring Committee and Pro Bono Committee.

Contact:Read more about David Picon

Yesterday, 23 law professors represented by Proskauer were granted permission to participate as amici curiae in a class action lawsuit contesting a recent U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) policy change affecting minors in New York who seek Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS).  This policy change has resulted in SIJS denials for immigrant children who would otherwise qualify for SIJS based on well-established state and federal law.

SIJS is a form of immigration relief that provides unmarried children under age 21 with a path to citizenship if they can provide a determination from a state juvenile court that they are dependent on the court or are committed by the court to the custody of a State entity or an individual; that reunification with one or both parents is not viable due to abuse, neglect, abandonment, or a similar basis under state law; and that it is not in their “best interest” to return to their country of origin.