On-Demand   On-Demand Web Programs

CMBS and the Real Estate Lawyer 2019: Lender and Borrower Issues in the Capital Market

Released on: Feb. 8, 2019
Running Time: 06:20:21

After robust CMBS issuance in 2015 and disappointing declines in CMBS originations for 2016 and 2017, CMBS loan originations are once again becoming a significant portion of mortgage loan origination.  The MBA’s latest Commercial/Multifamily Mortgage Debt Outstanding Report states that the level of such debt increased by $44.3 billion to end at $3.2 trillion for the first quarter. That increase was greater than “any other first quarter since before the Great Recession.” Find out how these unprecedented levels were driven by the CMBS market from our expert faculty as they discuss key developments in the CMBS market, including the state of the CMBS market, workouts and restructuring, and complex issues faced by CMBS borrowers. 

Lecture Topics [Total time 06:20:21]

Segments with an asterisk (*) are available only with the purchase of the entire program.

  • Introduction* [00:05:09]
    Joseph Philip Forte, Joseph Franzetti, Meredith J. Kane
  • Commercial Mortgage Securitization: Process & Structures [01:00:34]
    Joseph Franzetti, Daniel B. Rubock, Erin E. Stafford, Joseph Philip Forte
  • Creating the Mortgage Loan for Securitization [02:01:10]
    David W. Forti, Steven G. Horowitz, Ana Rosu Marmann, Daniel B. Rubock, Erin E. Stafford, Joseph Philip Forte
  • Componentizing the Mortgage Loan [01:15:09]
    David W. Forti, Ana Rosu Marmann, Daniel B. Rubock, Chris Fernandez, Joseph Philip Forte
  • Accumulation/Aggregation/Alternative Exit Strategies [00:58:30]
    Y. Jeffrey Rotblat, Micah J. Goodman, Michael Barbieri, Joseph Philip Forte
  • Administering the CMBS Trust Collateral Pools: Pre and Post Default Loan Administration [00:59:47]
    Erin E. Stafford, Chris Fernandez, David W. Forti, Joseph Philip Forte

The purchase price of this Web Program includes the following articles from the Course Handbook available online:

  • COMPLETE COURSE HANDBOOK
  • Capital Markets Mortgage: A Ratable Model for Main Street and Wall Street (1996)
    Joseph Philip Forte
  • A Securitization Primer
    Joseph Philip Forte
  • Scott Sinder and Jason Abel, Steptoe & Johnson LLP, Letter to CRE Finance Council Re: Final Risk Retention Rule (October 23, 2014)
    Joseph Philip Forte
  • Representations and Warranties—The Capital Markets Context
    Joseph Philip Forte
  • CMBS Overview (PowerPoint slides)
    Joseph Franzetti
  • Moody’s Investors Services, Sector In-Depth, CMBS–US, Key Pillars of Loan Structural Quality Are Eroding, Especially In Single-Borrower Deals (January 5, 2018)
    Daniel B. Rubock
  • The Transition from LIBOR to SOFR: A Risk Assessment Guide
    Joseph Philip Forte
  • CMBS Lending in the New Era of Credit Risk Retention
    Joseph Philip Forte
  • Model Representations and Warranties Proposed by Commercial Real Estate Finance Council
    Joseph Philip Forte
  • DBRS, Methodology, North American CMBS Surveillance Methodology (September 2018)
    Erin E. Stafford
  • DBRS, Methodology, North American Single-Asset/Single-Borrower Methodology (September 2018)
    Erin E. Stafford
  • DBRS, Methodology, North American CMBS Multiborrower Rating Methodology (September 2018)
    Erin E. Stafford
  • DBRS, Methodology, Rating North American CMBS Interest-Only Certificates (January 2018)
    Erin E. Stafford
  • Letters to Investment Groups (November 16, 2015)
    Joseph Philip Forte
  • William B. Dunn and Joseph Philip Forte, Loan Closing Legal Opinions and Rating Agencies: Disclosure Not Reliance
    Joseph Philip Forte
  • Scott Sinder and Jason Abel, Steptoe & Johnson LLP, Letter to CRE Finance Council Re: SEC Final Reg AB II Rule (September 3, 2014)
    Joseph Philip Forte
  • Creating the Securitized Asset: Key Issues for Special Purpose Entities and Non-Recourse Carve-Outs (November 2018)
    Steven G. Horowitz
  • Beyond LIBOR: The Transition to SOFR (December 7, 2018) (PowerPoint slides)
    Joseph Philip Forte
  • Moody’s Investors Services, Sector In-Depth, CMBS–US, Mezzanine Loan Intercreditor Agreements Have Evolved, to Mixed Credit Reviews (October 19, 2018)
    Daniel B. Rubock
  • Mezzanine Finance: A Legal Background
    Joseph Philip Forte
  • Componentizing the Securitized Asset (PowerPoint slides)
    David W. Forti
  • Rick Jones, Dechert LLP, Crunched Credit: Legal Commentary on the Commercial Real Estate Debt Market, The CRE CLO Is Back…and That’s Good (December 5, 2018)
    David W. Forti
  • Rick Jones, Dechert LLP, Crunched Credit: Legal Commentary on the Commercial Real Estate Debt Market, The Boundaries of Risk Retention Now That the D.C. Circuit Has Spoken (September 12, 2018)
    David W. Forti
  • CRE CLOs: An Overview (December 2018) (PowerPoint slides)
    Jeffrey Rotblat
  • Electronic Code of Federal Regulations, Title 17 (July 22, 2016)
    Stacy G. Ackermann
  • Securities and Exchange Commission, Rules and Regulations, 17 CFR Parts 240, 243, and 249b, Amendments to Rules for Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations; Proposed Rules for Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations; Final Rule and Proposed Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 74, No. 232, (December 4, 2009)
    Stacy G. Ackermann
  • Stacy Ackerman and Leslie Hayton, CRE Finance World Summer 2015, ASERs 2.0: Who Gets the Short End of the Stick?
    Stacy G. Ackermann
  • Pooling and Servicing Agreements (PowerPoint slides)
    Melissa Kato, Stacy G. Ackermann
  • Securitized Mortgage Loans—Tax Basics
    Joseph Philip Forte
  • Solving the Mortgage Tax Barrier to Defeasance in New York (2000)
    Joseph Philip Forte
  • Sample “Servicing Standard” Definitions
    Joseph Philip Forte
  • Working Out Securitized Mortgage Loans
    Joseph Philip Forte

Presentation Material

  • Commercial Mortgage Securitization: Process & Structures_PowerPoint Presentation
    Joseph Franzetti
  • Creating the Mortgage Loan for Securitization_PowerPoint Presentation
    Steven G. Horowitz
  • Delaware LLC Right of Division: A Lender’s Guide to Risk Mitigation
    Joseph Philip Forte
  • Componentizing the Mortgage Loan_PowerPoint Presentation
    David W. Forti
  • Accumulation/Aggregation/Alternative Exit Strategies_PowerPoint Presentation
    Y. Jeffrey Rotblat
Co-Chair(s)
Joseph Philip Forte ~ Sullivan & Worcester LLP
Meredith J. Kane ~ Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP
Speaker(s)
Michael Barbieri ~ Vice President, Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC
Chris Fernandez ~ K&L Gates LLP
David W. Forti ~ Dechert LLP
Joseph Franzetti ~ Senior Vice President, Berkadia Commercial Mortgage LLC
Micah J. Goodman ~ Managing Director and General Counsel, Benefit Street Partners Commercial Real Estate
Steven G. Horowitz ~ Chief Legal and Risk Officer, Open Space Institute
Ana Rosu Marmann ~ Director, Citigroup Global Markets Inc.
Y. Jeffrey Rotblat ~ Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP
Daniel B. Rubock ~ Senior Vice President, Moody's Investors Service, Inc.
Erin E. Stafford ~ Managing Director, DBRS, Inc.
General credit information about this format appears below. For credit information specific to this program, please choose your jurisdiction(s) in the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page.

PLI’s live and on-demand webcasts are single-user license products intended for an individual registrant only. Credit will be issued only to the individual registered.


U.S. MCLE States

Alabama:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

Alaska:  All PLI products can fulfill Alaska’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Arizona:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “interactive CLE” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via interactive CLE programs.

Arkansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for Arkansas CLE credit.

California:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “participatory” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via participatory programs.

Colorado:  All PLI products can fulfill Colorado’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Connecticut: Effective January 1, 2017, all PLI products can fulfill Connecticut’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Delaware:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “eCLE” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of eCLE per reporting period, no more than 6 of which may be audio-only.

Florida:  All PLI products can fulfill Florida’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Georgia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “in-house” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 in-house credits per reporting period.

Hawaii:  All PLI products can fulfill Hawaii’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Idaho:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Illinois:  All PLI products can fulfill Illinois' CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Indiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance education” credit. Attorneys are limited to 9 credits of distance education per reporting period. Effective January 1, 2019, the limit of distance education per reporting period will increase from 9 to 18 credits.

Iowa:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “unmoderated” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of unmoderated programs per reporting period.

Kansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “prerecorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of prerecorded programs per reporting period.

Kentucky:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “non-live” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 non-live credits per reporting period.

Louisiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Maine:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5.5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Minnesota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 on-demand credits per reporting period.

Mississippi:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Missouri:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Montana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Nebraska:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “computer-based learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of computer-based learning per reporting period.

Nevada:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via self-study programs.

New Hampshire:  All PLI products can fulfill New Hampshire’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

New Jersey:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternative verifiable learning formats” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of alternative verifiable learning formats per reporting period.

New Mexico:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

New York

Experienced Attorneys:  All PLI products can fulfill New York’s CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Newly Admitted Attorneys:  PLI’s transitional on-demand web programs can be used to fulfill the requirements for New York newly admitted attorneys. Only professional practice and law practice management credits may be earned via transitional on-demand web programs. Ethics and skills credits may not be earned via on-demand web programs.

North Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

North Dakota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Ohio:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Oklahoma:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online, on-demand programs per reporting period.

Oregon:  All PLI products can fulfill Oregon’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Pennsylvania:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Puerto Rico:  All PLI products can fulfill Puerto Rico’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Rhode Island:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “video replay” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 video replay credits per reporting period.

South Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternatively delivered” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of alternatively delivered programs per reporting period.

Tennessee:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Texas:  All PLI products can fulfill Texas’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Utah:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Vermont:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 10 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Virgin Islands:  All PLI products can fulfill the Virgin Islands’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “pre-recorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of pre-recorded programs per reporting period.

Washington:  All PLI products can fulfill Washington’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

West Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of online instruction per reporting period.

Wisconsin:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “repeated, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of repeated, on-demand programs per reporting period. No ethics credits can be earned via on-demand web programs.

Wyoming:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.


CPD Jurisdictions

British Columbia (CPD-BC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not eligible for CPD-BC credit unless viewed with at least one other attorney or an articled student. In this case, the credit must be recorded as a “study group.”

Ontario (CPD-ON):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “recorded” credit. If viewed without a colleague, attorneys are limited to 6 credits of recorded programs per year. If viewed with at least one colleague, there is no limit to the number of credits that can be earned via recorded programs.

Quebec (CPD-QC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill Quebec’s CPD requirements.

Hong Kong (CPD-HK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CPD-HK credit.

United Kingdom (CPD-UK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill the United Kingdom’s CPD requirements.

Australia (CPD-AUS):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Australia’s CPD requirements. Credit limits for on-demand web programs vary according to jurisdiction. Please refer to your jurisdiction’s CPD information page for specifics.

Alberta (CPD-ALBERTA):  All PLI products can fulfill Alberta’s CPD requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Dubai (CLPD-DUBAI):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill CLPD credit requirements.


Other Credit Types

CPE Credit (NASBA):  Select on-demand web programs qualify as the “QAS Self-Study” delivery method. Please check the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page to verify CPE credit availability.

IRS Continuing Education (IRS-CE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill IRS-CE requirements. To request IRS-CE credit, please notify PLI at plicredits@pli.edu of your request and include your Preparer Tax Identification Number (PTIN).

Certified Fraud Examiner CPE:  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Certified Fraud Examiner CPE requirements. To request CPE credit or find out which programs offer CPE, please contact PLI at plicredits@pli.edu.

IAPP Continuing Privacy Credit (CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Privacy CPE credit requirements.

HR Recertification (HRCI):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill HR credit requirements.

SHRM Recertification (SHRM):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as "self-paced" credit. SHRM professionals are limited to 30 credits of self-paced programs per recertification period.

Compliance Certification Board (CCB):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Candidates are limited to 10 self-study credits per 12-month period, and certification holders are limited to 20 self-study credits per 2-year renewal period.

Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialists Certification (CAMS):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CAMS credit.

New York State Social Worker Continuing Education (SW CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for SW CPE credit.

American Bankers Association Professional Certification (ABA):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill ABA credit requirements.

Certified Financial Planners (CFP):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CFP credit.

 

Related Items

Handbook  Course Handbook Archive

CMBS and the Real Estate Lawyer 2019: Lender and Borrower Issues in the Capital Market Meredith J. Kane, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP
Joseph Philip Forte, Sullivan & Worcester LLP
 
CMBS and the Real Estate Lawyer 2018: Lender and Borrower Issues in the Capital Market Meredith J. Kane, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP
Joseph Philip Forte, Sullivan & Worcester LLP
 
Share
Email

  • FOLLOW PLI:
  • twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube
  • RSS

All Contents Copyright © 1996-2019 Practising Law Institute. Continuing Legal Education since 1933.

© 2019 PLI PRACTISING LAW INSTITUTE. All rights reserved. The PLI logo is a service mark of PLI.