Client Alert: The $35 Billion Reckoning: Why Family Offices Need Litigation Counsel Before the Deal Breaks

Over $35 billion in family office losses since 2020 expose a troubling pattern: institutional lenders systematically enable excessive risk-taking during market booms, then deploy asymmetric deal structures that devastate family wealth when conditions deteriorate. From Archegos’s $20 billion collapse to regional banking failures that stranded ultra-wealthy clients, the evidence shows that sophisticated financing arrangements consistently favor institutional players during stress periods. Quinn Emanuel’s recent victories recovering hundreds of millions for family office clients demonstrate how early involvement of litigation counsel can neutralize these institutional advantages and protect family wealth before crisis management becomes necessary.

 

I. Background

The Institutional Boom-Bust Cycle: Recent disasters reveal a destructive pattern where banks and private equity firms compete aggressively for family office relationships by offering increasingly favorable terms during good times. Consider Credit Suisse’s relationship with Archegos: over just 18 months, the bank progressively reduced margin requirements from 20% to 7.5% on Bill Hwang’s positions despite his 2012 insider trading conviction and despite Archegos’s exposure growing to $160 billion—a 16-to-1 leverage ratio achieved with just $10 billion in equity. Credit Suisse’s internal investigation revealed risk managers were systematically overruled by revenue-focused business units competing for Archegos’s lucrative fee business. This wasn’t an isolated case. Regional banks accumulated commercial real estate exposure at multiples exceeding 300% of capital to serve wealthy clients, with some institutions like Valley National Bank reaching 479% CRE-to-capital ratios. The competitive dynamic systematically subordinates prudent risk management to revenue generation.

When Markets Turn: The consequences became catastrophic when markets deteriorated. On March 22, 2021, ViacomCBS announced a secondary offering that triggered Archegos’s unraveling. Within days, Hwang faced $42 billion in margin calls he couldn’t meet. The forced liquidation wiped out $20 billion in family wealth while banks scrambled to protect themselves—Credit Suisse suffered $5.5 billion in losses, Nomura lost $2.85 billion, but faster-moving Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley limited losses to under $1 billion each by liquidating positions before others. The speed differential illustrates the institutional advantage: banks with sophisticated risk systems and workout protocols moved decisively while Archegos faced complete wealth destruction.

Singapore’s Hin Leong Trading collapse exposed similar dynamics in commodity financing. The Lim family’s oil trading empire concealed $800 million in futures losses while owing $3.85 billion to 23 banks. When oil prices collapsed in 2020, the fraud unraveled. HSBC faced $600 million exposure, while Singapore’s DBS, OCBC, and UOB collectively held over $590 million. Founder Lim Oon Kuin received 17.5 years in prison and the family was declared bankrupt with a $3.5 billion civil judgment—losing everything built over a century. Meanwhile, institutional lenders worked collectively to maximize recovery through the liquidation process.

Silicon Valley Bank’s March 2023 collapse demonstrated how even “safe” banking relationships contained hidden risks. SVB’s wealth division managed $14.4 billion for over 3,000 high-net-worth clients, with over 90% of deposits exceeding FDIC insurance limits. Family offices faced immediate liquidity crises and uncertainty about recovering uninsured deposits. While government intervention ultimately protected all depositors, the panic triggered a wealth management talent exodus—Constellation Wealth Advisors took $12 billion to Cresset Asset Management, Morgan Stanley absorbed multiple teams managing billions, and family office clients discovered their supposedly stable banking relationships could evaporate within 72 hours.

Current Global Risks: With mounting pressures across regions—US commercial real estate vacancy rates at 30-year highs of 18%, European banks under stress, Middle Eastern liquidity constraints, and Asian property market instability—family offices face heightened risk that institutional counterparties will prioritize their own survival over client relationships.

II. Opinion

The Institutional Advantage: The $35 billion loss pattern reveals how institutional lenders systematically prepare for workout scenarios while family offices remain focused on deal benefits. Banks maintain specialized workout teams, retain restructuring counsel, and structure agreements anticipating future stress—advantages family offices can only neutralize through equally sophisticated legal preparation.

Hidden Vulnerabilities in Family Office Deals:

• Escalating fee structures that extract wealth during distress: One family office faced a $40 million “forbearance fee” added to their loan balance in February 2025—not for any new capital or covenant relief, but simply because the bank could impose it under workout provisions negotiated when times were good. The fee represented pure wealth transfer from family to bank with no economic justification beyond contractual leverage.
• Accelerated payment terms triggered by market conditions: When Credit Suisse began liquidating Archegos positions on March 26, 2021, Bill Hwang had no ability to negotiate or slow the process. The prime brokerage agreements gave banks unilateral right to liquidate at their discretion during margin call events. Archegos went from $36 billion in assets to complete liquidation in 72 hours while Credit Suisse’s faster-moving competitors protected themselves first.
• Broad release provisions that eliminate legal claims: In multiple forbearance agreements signed between 2023-2025, family offices agreed to releases of “any and all claims” in ALL CAPS language—releases negotiated by institutional counsel who knew exactly what they were taking off the table. These releases later prevented families from pursuing economic duress, fraudulent inducement, or breach of fiduciary duty claims even when banks engaged in questionable conduct.
• Cross-default mechanisms creating cascading failures: Hin Leong’s default on futures contracts triggered cross-defaults across all 23 banking relationships simultaneously. The family couldn’t negotiate with lenders individually because each bank’s agreement gave them termination rights based on defaults elsewhere. This coordination problem prevented any workout and forced immediate liquidation.
• Lien subordination where families lose priority overnight: In one recent transaction, a family office discovered their “senior secured” position had been structurally subordinated when the bank helped the borrower create new super-priority debt at an operating subsidiary level. The family’s liens remained at the holding company, but all valuable assets and cash flow had migrated down the corporate structure to entities they had no claims against.
• Information asymmetries where institutions coordinate while families operate alone: During the Archegos collapse, prime brokers including Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, Deutsche Bank, and Credit Suisse were calling each other to understand total exposure and coordinate liquidation strategy. Archegos had no visibility into these conversations and no ability to coordinate its own defense across multiple prime broker relationships.

How Early Litigation Counsel Creates Value:

• Pre-signature deal analysis identifying problematic terms while negotiating power remains: Litigation counsel reviews credit agreements with a different lens than transactional lawyers—focusing not on market standard terms but on how provisions could be weaponized during stress. This means identifying consent thresholds, amendment rights, acceleration triggers, and release scope before you sign.
• Ongoing relationship monitoring to spot emerging issues before they become crises: When institutional lenders suddenly request forbearance agreements, demand additional reporting, or suggest bringing in workout specialists, these are early warning signals. Litigation counsel can assess whether you’re facing normal business stress or the beginning of predatory positioning.
• Strategic positioning during initial stress to maintain leverage rather than capitulate: In a recent matter, we instructed the family office to stop signing releases and dare Goldman Sachs to foreclose—a strategy that confused and angered the bank but preserved legal claims while buying time for refinancing. That single decision proved decisive in ultimately recovering $50 million.
• Aggressive advocacy when workout specialists attempt to steamroll family interests: Institutional workout teams are trained to project certainty and inevitability—”you must sign this forbearance or we’ll accelerate immediately.” Sophisticated litigation counsel challenges these assertions, forcing banks to show their hand on what they’re actually willing to do versus what they’re threatening to do.
• Settlement leverage through credible litigation threats that force better outcomes: In a recent matter, we drafted comprehensive TRO papers and were prepared to file in New York within 48 hours. That credible threat—backed by retention of financial advisors and a detailed complaint showing viable claims—forced the counterparty’s senior management to overrule their workout team and settle at terms recovering $70 million in value.
• Creative legal theories that institutional lenders don’t anticipate: The prima facie tort claim in another recent matter was esoteric enough that Goldman Sachs hadn’t prepared defenses. Of several dozen cases we researched, only one had survived a motion to dismiss on similar facts. But the claim was arguably not subject to existing releases and fell outside arbitration clauses—creating just enough uncertainty to drive a massive settlement.

Proven Results—Before and During Crisis: Quinn Emanuel’s recent successes illustrate how litigation expertise creates value at every stage of institutional relationships. In one matter, we were brought in while the family office still maintained its banking relationship—not because litigation was imminent, but to assess strategic options. By identifying the lender’s contractual breaches and developing prima facie tort theories early, we created leverage that recovered $50 million without ever filing a complaint. In another case, our involvement during the initial stages of deal stress—before the situation became a full workout—enabled us to position the client for potential litigation, which forced institutional counterparties back to the negotiating table and recovered $70 million in value. Whether you call us before stress emerges or in the middle of a crisis, our track record shows we can identify opportunities and create leverage that other firms miss.

The Economics of Prevention: Bringing in litigators early, especially before things fall apart, costs a fraction of crisis management while delivering substantially better outcomes. Institutional lenders expect family offices to rely on relationship management and compromise—they don’t expect sophisticated legal strategies deployed before stress becomes crisis. That element of surprise, combined with our ability to think several moves ahead like litigators even in seemingly non-litigation contexts, is precisely what creates value for family offices navigating complex institutional relationships.

III. Significance

Systematic Institutional Preparation: The Archegos case study reveals the depth of institutional preparation. Credit Suisse maintained dedicated prime services teams, employed sophisticated risk models (which they ignored), and had entire workout infrastructures ready to deploy. When margin calls hit, they executed coordinated liquidation strategies across global markets within hours. Archegos had none of this infrastructure—just family office staff focused on investment strategy, not institutional warfare. This asymmetry repeats across every major family office disaster.

Economic Warning Signs: Current conditions suggest accelerating stress across key family office exposure areas. Commercial real estate vacancy rates have reached 30-year highs, European banks face mounting pressure, bankruptcies of levered private equity-owned companies have reached record highs, and cross-border financing arrangements create contagion risks that could trigger rapid institutional defensive positioning.

Strategic Response Framework: Family offices should immediately assess institutional relationships with litigation counsel involvement, particularly arrangements involving:

Priority Review Areas:

• Commercial real estate financing given current market distress
• Regional bank relationships following 2023 failures and ongoing consolidation
• Cross-border structures exposed to currency, regulatory, and sovereign risks
• Private credit arrangements with non-bank institutional lenders
• Derivative positions that could trigger margin calls during market volatility
• Co-Investment terms for private equity investments with greater than 3x leverage

Implementation Steps:

• Comprehensive relationship audits to identify asymmetric terms and hidden vulnerabilities
• Scenario planning for workout situations before they materialize
• Legal theory development to establish potential claims and defenses
• Institutional intelligence on counterparty workout practices and personnel
• Coordination strategies across multiple financing relationships and jurisdictions

The Quinn Emanuel Advantage: Our track record demonstrates unique capability to identify narrow but powerful legal theories that create settlement leverage even in challenging situations. The combination of recent recoveries totaling hundreds of millions and deep understanding of institutional workout dynamics positions us to protect family wealth proactively rather than reactively.

Immediate Action Required: The current global economic environment may not provide advance warning before institutional counterparties shift from partnership to predatory positioning. Family offices that wait for clear crisis signals will find themselves negotiating from positions of weakness with counterparties who have been preparing for stress scenarios throughout the relationship.

***

If you have any questions about the issues addressed in this memorandum, or if you would like a copy of any of the materials mentioned in it, please do not hesitate to reach out to:

Max Hawley
Associate, New York
maxwellhawley@quinnemanuel.com, Tel: +212-849-7127

Victor Noskov
Partner, New York
victornoskov@quinnemanuel.com, Tel: +212-849-7620

To view more memoranda, please visit www.quinnemanuel.com/the-firm/publications/