On-Demand   On-Demand Web Programs

Leveraged Financing 2017

Released on: May. 12, 2017
Running Time: 06:29:27

In this program, the country’s leading experts in leveraged finance will examine key concepts and strategies in serving leveraged companies, including portfolio companies of private equity firms. You will learn about the leveraged finance marketplace, including new deal activity, continuing refinancing needs, evolving trends in leveraged finance, funding sources and product offerings, the impact of macro-economic, regulatory and political developments, current covenant approaches, and financing product alternatives.

You will learn:

  • Business and legal drivers of deal activity
  • Deal structuring considerations and approaches
  • Financing trends, including the increasing role of direct lending and other alternative sources of capital
  • Commitment letters and the acquisition financing process
  • Case law developments every practitioner should know
  • The latest financing documentation topics and trends

Special Feature:

  • Earn one hour of ethics credit

Credit Offered:  CLE, CPE and CPD

Transactional attorneys, internal investment bank legal advisers and anyone whose responsibilities require an awareness of recent developments in leveraged finance techniques, will benefit from this program.

Lecture Topics [Total time 06:29:27]

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


  • Opening Remarks and Introduction* [00:01:22]
    David A. Brittenham, Patrick J. Ryan
  • Leveraged Financing in 2017 [01:37:28]
    David A. Brittenham, Anthony J. McMahon, Michele O. Penzer, Patrick J. Ryan
  • Leveraged Finance Restructuring [01:16:02]
    Angela L. Fontana, Lisa M. Schweitzer
  • Direct Lending and Other Alternative Capital [01:18:52]
    Stephen A. Boyko, Bruce A. Frank, Jay J. Kim, Milwood Hobbs, Jr.
  • Financing an Acquisition [01:15:22]
    Jennifer B. Ezring, Jennifer L. Hobbs, Jason Kyrwood, Jeffrey E. Ross
  • Ethical Considerations in Leveraged Financings [01:00:21]
    Edwin E. Smith, Julian S.H. Chung

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


  • COMPLETE COURSE HANDBOOK
  • Debt Retirement in Leveraged Financings (February 2017)
    Scott B. Selinger, David A. Brittenham
  • Second Circuit Lifts Cloud of Uncertainty Over Bond Restructurings (February 2017)
    My Chi To, Richard F. Hahn, Jasmine Ball, Shannon Rose Selden, Scott B. Selinger, Jeffrey E. Ross, David A. Brittenham, M. Natasha Labovitz, Craig A. Bruens, Christopher Updike
  • Case Law Developments (February 2017)
    David A. Brittenham, Ramya S. Tiller, Anna N. Smith, Theodore Shen
  • Table of Cases
    David A. Brittenham
  • Latham & Watkins LLP, The Book of Jargon, The Latham & Watkins Glossary of US Corporate and Bank Finance Slang and Terminology, Second Edition
    Michele O. Penzer
  • Marblegate: The Southern District’s Ruling Overturned—Now What?
    Craig E. Chapman, Angela L. Fontana, Eric S. Haueter, Alan G. Grinceri, Michael Hyatte, Edward D. Ricchiuto
  • Recent Trends and Considerations in Debtor in Possession Financing
    Lisa M. Schweitzer, Thomas Kessler
  • Sandra Lee Montgomery, The Continuing Evolution of Middle Market Lending
    Stephen A. Boyko
  • Unitranche Financing: UK vs. US Models
    Stuart Brinkworth, Julian S.H. Chung
  • Dealing with Existing Debt in Leveraged Transactions (February 2017)
    Jennifer L. Hobbs, Jennifer B. Ezring, Jason Kyrwood, Jeffrey E. Ross
  • Selected Ethical Issues in Leveraged Financings
    Christine Gould Hamm, Edwin E. Smith, Julian S.H. Chung
  • Ethical Issues in Leveraged Financing Transactions (PowerPoint slides)
    Edwin E. Smith, Julian S.H. Chung

Presentation Material


  • Leveraged Financing Today
    David A. Brittenham
  • State of the Markets
    Anthony J. McMahon
  • Leveraged Finance Restructuring
    Angela L. Fontana, Lisa M. Schweitzer
  • Direct Lending and Other Alternative Capital
    Stephen A. Boyko, Bruce A. Frank, Milwood Hobbs, Jr., Jay J. Kim
  • Financing an Acquisition
    Jennifer B. Ezring, Jennifer L. Hobbs, Jason Kyrwood, Jeffrey E. Ross
  • Ethical Considerations in Leveraged Financings
    Julian S.H. Chung, Edwin E. Smith
Co-Chair(s)
David A. Brittenham ~ Debevoise & Plimpton LLP
Patrick J. Ryan ~ Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP
Speaker(s)
Stephen A. Boyko ~ Proskauer Rose LLP
Julian S.H. Chung ~ Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP
Jennifer B. Ezring ~ Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP
Angela L. Fontana ~ Sidley Austin LLP
Bruce A. Frank ~ General Counsel, Antares Capital LP
Jennifer L. Hobbs ~ Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP
Milwood Hobbs, Jr. ~ Managing Director, Oaktree Capital Management
Jay J. Kim ~ Ropes & Gray LLP
Jason Kyrwood ~ Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP
Anthony J. McMahon ~ Vice President, Leveraged Finance, J.P. Morgan
Michele O. Penzer ~ Latham & Watkins LLP
Jeffrey E. Ross ~ Debevoise & Plimpton LLP
Lisa M. Schweitzer ~ Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP
Edwin E. Smith ~ Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP
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.

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

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

Rhode Island:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 3 on-demand 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:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “A/V” credit. Attorneys are limited to 22.5 credits of A/V programs per reporting period.

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.


Other Credit Types

CPE Credit (NASBA):  Select on-demand web programs qualify as “QAS Self-Study” credit. 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.

 

Related Items

Live Programs  Live Programs

Leveraged Financing 2018 (New York, NY) May. 2, 2018

Handbook  Course Handbook Archive

Leveraged Financing 2018  
Leveraged Financing 2017 David A Brittenham, Debevoise & Plimpton LLP
Patrick J Ryan, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP
 
Share
Email

  • FOLLOW PLI:
  • twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • GooglePlus
  • RSS

All Contents Copyright © 1996-2017 Practising Law Institute. Continuing Legal Education since 1933.

© 2017 PLI PRACTISING LAW INSTITUTE. All rights reserved. The PLI logo is a service mark of PLI.