On-Demand   On-Demand Web Programs

Doing Deals 2018: The Art of M&A Transactional Practice

Released on: May. 18, 2018
Running Time: 06:09:28
The M&A market has seen a flurry of activity in 2017 with ups and downs, as macroeconomic trends and expectations continue to seesaw.  In addition to the continued high volumes, the market has also seen a number of hostile deals, creative deal structures, shareholder activist campaigns, and developments in Delaware M&A jurisprudence, as well as deal technology. This year’s program will also include the first-time addition of an in-house lawyers’ panel, which will give us insights into “views from the inside.”  These trends and developments are among the points that will be discussed at the Doing Deals program.

A prominent faculty of top lawyers and investment bankers will share their years of experience and teach you how best to represent your clients by creatively structuring, coordinating and managing M&A transactions.

Lecture Topics [Total time 06:09:28]
Segments with an asterisk (*) are available only with the purchase of the entire program.
  • Opening Remarks* [00:23:59]
    Igor Kirman
  • The Art of Deal Structuring [01:14:33]
    Wilson Chu, Stephen S. Coats, Raymond Gietz, Louis Goldberg
  • Getting the Deal Started: Preliminary Agreements and the Role of Financial Advisors [01:33:07]
    Scott W. Golenbock, Jane Greyf, Kevin Miller, Patrick Suehnholz
  • View from the Inside: Negotiating Acquisition Agreements [01:29:46]
    Christina Ackermann, Stephen Diamond, Igor Kirman, Kira M. Schwartz
  • It’s a Hostile World: Takeover Defense and Hostile Deals [01:28:03]
    Stephen M. Kotran, Trevor S. Norwitz, Paul J. Shim

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

  • COMPLETE COURSE HANDBOOK
  • Wilson Chu, Soren Lindstrom and Diego Gómez-Cornejo, The Art of Cross-Border Deal Structuring: Debunking Myths for Foreign Acquirors of U.S. Targets
    Wilson Chu
  • Scott W. Golenbock and Brien Wassner, Managing Multi-Process Exit Transactions
    Scott W. Golenbock
  • Deal Lawyers; Vol. 11, No. 1: The Disclosure of Material Relationships by Financial Advisors—Board Disclosure Memos v. Engagement Letter Provisions (January–February 2017)
    Kevin Miller
  • Rural/Metro One Year Later: Ongoing Doctrinal Concerns; DealLawyers.com Interview (December 8, 2016)
    Kevin Miller
  • Takeover Law and Practice (March 7, 2018)
    Igor Kirman
  • Igor Kirman and Victor Goldfeld, Practical Law: Contingent Value Rights (CVRs)
    Igor Kirman
  • It’s a Hostile World: Responding to Unsolicited Take-Over Proposals
    Trevor S. Norwitz, Stephen M. Kotran, Paul J. Shim

Presentation Material

  • Introduction: M&A Trends and Developments
    Igor Kirman
  • Private Equity Considerations in M&A
    Stephen S. Coats
  • Structuring Deals
    Raymond Gietz, Louis Goldberg
  • Travel Advisories for the Globetrotting American Deal Lawyer
    Wilson Chu
  • M&A Confidentiality Agreements, Letters of Intent and Other Preliminary Matters
    Scott W. Golenbock, Jane Greyf
  • Working with Financial Advisors
    Kevin Miller, Patrick Suehnholz
  • 2017 Hostile M&A and Activism
    Stephen M. Kotran, Trevor S. Norwitz, Paul J. Shim
Chairperson(s)
Igor Kirman ~ Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz
Speaker(s)
Christina Ackermann ~ Executive Vice President and General Counsel, Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc.
Wilson Chu ~ McDermott Will & Emery LLP
Stephen S. Coats ~ General Counsel, Riverstone Holdings LLC
Stephen Diamond ~ Assistant General Counsel, Mergers & Acquisitions, Pfizer Inc.
Raymond Gietz ~ Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
Louis Goldberg ~ Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP
Scott W. Golenbock ~ Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP
Jane Greyf ~ Goodwin Procter LLP
Stephen M. Kotran ~ Sullivan & Cromwell LLP
Kevin Miller ~ Alston & Bird LLP
Trevor S. Norwitz ~ Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz
Kira M. Schwartz ~ Senior Vice President, Associate General Counsel, M&A, Licensing, Alliance Management & Corporate Affairs, Allergan
Paul J. Shim ~ Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP
Patrick Suehnholz ~ Chief Operating Officer , Greenhill & Co., LLC
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

Live Programs  Live Programs

Doing Deals 2019: The Art of M&A Transactional Practice (New York, NY) Mar. 6, 2019

Handbook  Course Handbook Archive

Doing Deals 2018: The Art of M&A Transactional Practice Igor Kirman, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz
 
Share
Email
“Good presentation-as usual.”
-Linda Mock, Celanese Corporation

“Great panels and discussions.”
-David D., Horizon Pharma

“Great program, lots of valuable information.”
-Dmitriy Tartakovskiy, Greenberg Traurig, LLP


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

All Contents Copyright © 1996-2018 Practising Law Institute. Continuing Legal Education since 1933.

© 2018 PLI PRACTISING LAW INSTITUTE. All rights reserved. The PLI logo is a service mark of PLI.