Category Archives: Programs (free)

One-Hour Briefing: COVID-19 and Issues for Legal Librarians

LIVE WEBCAST: June 11, 2020 3:00 pm EDT

As the legal community adjusts to the COVID-19 new normal virtual work environment, law librarians face unique challenges.  It is vitally important for law librarians to be proactive in monitoring the needs of the respective practice areas they support, including ensuring adequate research is being performed in those hot Covid-19 practice areas and ensuring alerts have been set up to monitor late breaking legislative and regulatory changes. Additionally, now is the time to proactively communicate the existence of virtual research tools and provide training when lawyers cannot fall back on print.

Please join Steven A. Lastres, Director of Knowledge Management Services at Debevoise & Plimpton and Kathryn McRae, Director of Research & Knowledge at Hawkins Delafield & Wood LLP for a discussion addressing:

  • The long term opportunities this pandemic provides to eliminate all print from remaining collections
  • How to proactively market AI and data analytics tools to reluctant lawyers
  • Staffing considerations and project assignments
  • Virtual training options for summer associates
  • Long-term team management
  • Leveraging alternate electronic library resources
  • Vendor communication

This program is free to attend. Register online with the priority code FREE COVID.

PLI Free Fridays

Each Friday, PLI offers everyone one week of free access to one web segment or One-Hour Audio Briefing from its catalog of more than 3,500 hours of on-demand offerings. These Free Friday segments are good for one full hour of CLE credit, and can be passed along to clients, colleagues, or anyone in need of training.

Free Fridays are brought to you by the PLI SmartBrief, a free daily e-newsletter that delivers all of the legal news you need (plus Free Fridays!) right to your desktop. Editors handpick key articles from hundreds of publications specifically with practicing attorneys in mind, summarizing the content and linking back to the original sources.  Go here to sign up for PLI SmartBrief.

This Friday, PLI is offering a segment from the 17th Annual Real Estate Tax Forum.  The segment, Current Developments, will provide an overview of the significant changes to tax law, recent legislation, case law, regulations and rulings over the past year and the impacts they have on your clients.

To view our Free Friday program, you will need to create a PLI account, if you don’t already have one.  Programs will remain free only for one week; be sure to add to your library during this period. Click here and follow the on-screen instructions.

As a reminder, PLI Privileged Members have access to all of PLI’s live programs, Webcasts, and on-demand programs.  


Free One-Hour Briefing on Accessing Justice: Ethics and Lawsuit Financing in a New Era

The expense of bringing a case to trial for attorneys, firms, and the parties themselves can be astronomical. How often in your practice do you reject cases because neither your firm nor the client will be able to shoulder the costs of litigation, particularly in cases that will be complicated or protracted? Have you found yourself at the receiving end of a scorched-earth defense strategy that has swallowed up firm resources and profits? Have your clients struggled to meet operating expenses while waiting for their day in court? What options do litigators without deep pockets have to properly prepare and bring cases to trial and appeal?

The use of alternative litigation finance (“ALF”) has engendered spirited debate within the legal community, largely centered upon its impact on attorney ethics requirements. Does a third party’s investment impact an attorney’s duty to use independent professional judgment? Can it cause impermissible conflicts of interest? Does it potentially threaten sacred attorney-client and work product privileges?

In this engaging and informative program, James Batson, an attorney with over 20 years of litigation expertise and an Investment Manager and Legal Counsel to Bentham IMF, will introduce the use of litigation funding as a modern means to ensure meritorious cases get the commitment of resources they deserve. In addition to introducing the basics of alternative litigation finance, Jim will address numerous Rules of Professional Responsibility and how they intersect with litigation funding.

A detailed appendix will be provided containing the ethics opinions and additional contents discussed during the program.

Register now and don’t miss this important free briefing!


PLI Free Fridays

Each Friday, PLI offers everyone one week of free access to one web segment or One-Hour Audio Briefing from its catalog of more than 3,500 hours of on-demand offerings. These Free Friday segments are good for one full hour of CLE credit, and can be passed along to clients, colleagues, or anyone in need of training.

As a reminder, PLI Privileged Members have access to all of PLI’s live programs, Webcasts, and on-demand programs.

Free One Hour Briefing on U.S. Sanctions Relating to the Unrest in Ukraine: Compliance Challenges

October 9, 2014, 1:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (E.D.T.)

The United States began by imposing sanctions on persons and entities associated with the unrest in the Ukraine, but the sanctions have been expanded to target broader segments of the Russian economy with the adoption of new sectoral sanctions. Please join Stephan E. Becker of Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP and Corinne A. Goldstein of Covington & Burling LLP for a discussion of topics including:

  • The scope of the U.S. sanctions administered by the Treasury and Commerce Departments
  • The implementation of sectoral sanctions on the Russian financial, defense and oil & gas sectors
  • Recent expansions of the sanctions and potential future changes

Register now and don’t miss this important free briefing!

Free One Hour Briefing on What’s Going on at the SEC and PCAOB – What You Need to Know Now

October 8, 2014, 1:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (E.D.T.)

Both the SEC’s Division of Corporation and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board are engaged in major projects that may significantly change the public company disclosures about financial results, controls and audits. A panel including a PCAOB Board Member, the Chief Accountant of the SEC Corp Fin Division and a former SEC Chief Accountant who now serves on two audit committees, along with leading legal and audit firm partners who counsel clients on disclosure and financial reporting issues will provide a lively One-Hour briefing on the developments you need to know about now.

Topics will include:

  • The SEC’s major disclosure review project, now underway
  • Latest SEC staff and PCAOB guidance on financial reporting and accounting issues, including revenue recognition
  • The current status of PCAOB initiatives to reform the auditor reporting model, to evaluate its going concern standard in light of a recent FASB going concern standard, to provide guidance on fair value auditing and other topics
  • PCAOB’s audit committee outreach efforts
  • Possible rulemaking in the next six months, including audit committee reporting
  • The impact of all of this on audit committees and those who advise them


John F. Olson, Partner, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP


Michael J. Gallagher, Managing Partner, Assurance Quality, PricewaterhouseCoopers

Linda L. Griggs, Partner, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP

Jay D. Hanson, Board Member, Public Company Accounting Oversight Board

Mark Kronforst, Chief Accountant, Division of Corporation Finance, United States Securities and Exchange Commission

Donald T. Nicolaisen, Independent Director, Morgan Stanley, MGIC Investment Corp., Verizon, Zurich Insurance Group

Register now and don’t miss this important free briefing!

Free One Hour Briefing on Defining “Waters of the United States”: What is at Stake?

American FlagOctober 2, 2014, 1:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (E.D.T.)

On April 21, 2014, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Defense (DOD) published a rule-making proposal to revise the definition of “waters of the United States,” a key statutory term used to prescribe the extent of federal jurisdiction to regulate a variety of activities under the Clean Water Act (CWA). 79 Fed. Reg. 22188. The current comment period for the proposal expires on October 20, 2014.

This closely watched and highly controversial proposal follows on more than forty years of CWA implementation, three landmark Supreme Court decisions and the issuance of shifting guidance documents by EPA and DOD over the course of the past several presidential administrations. Much of the current debate centers on how the agencies should interpret and apply the Court’s 4-1-4 decision in Rapanos v. United States, 547 U.S. 715 (2006), which generated considerable confusion as to the reach of federal jurisdiction under the CWA. The EPA/DOD proposal aims to clarify matters, and stakeholders have expressed serious doubts as to whether the proposal makes matters better or worse.

A good deal is at stake. Once finalized, the proposal will influence every regulatory program under the statute, from wastewater permitting under Section 402, to discharges of dredged or fill material under Section 404, to oil spill liability and prevention under Section 311, to State obligations to establish water quality standards under Section 303. Each of these programs applies only to “waters of the United States.” Many stakeholders believe the agencies’ proposal would greatly expand the universe of waters to be protected by these programs.

While only a page or so in length, the proposed definition is intricate, and it differs from the existing definition in several key respects. The agencies have defined “tributaries” quite broadly, to include ponds and even ditches in certain circumstances. They have proposed to exert jurisdiction over adjacent waters of all kinds, not merely wetlands as before, and have defined “adjacent” broadly. They have proposed to exert jurisdiction on a case-by-case basis over “other” waters, and have defined this category of waters using a “significant nexus” test put forth by a single Justice in a concurring opinion in Rapanos. And the agencies have proposed specific exclusions from the definition for certain ditches and water features that are used in particular ways.

Please join attorney James T. Banks, leader of the Environmental Practice at Hogan Lovells US LLP as he addresses:

  • What regulated parties will need to understand this proposal
  • What States and local governments will need to understand this proposal
  • The potential need for regulated parties, States and local governments to provide their input to the agencies during the comment period

Register now and don’t miss this important free briefing!

Free One Hour Briefing on Telling the Story of Your Complex Case

October 1, 2014, 1:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (E.D.T.)

Storytelling is the most effective form of persuasion. Neither law schools nor the practice of law provide much, if any, training on how to develop likely the most important skill an advocate must possess: the ability to tell and present a persuasive story that resonates and convinces the audience on an intellectual and emotional level. Good storytelling is good advocacy.

In this briefing, David Henry Dolkas, a partner with McDermott Will & Emery LLP, and the author of Managing Complex IP Litigation will cover:

  • The five reasons that most presentations are ineffective and fail to resonate and convince.
  • How to address and answer the “Key Questions” presented by your complex case.
  • How to take the answers to the Key Questions and apply principles of screen writing and narrative to build the story of your complex case.
  • How to tell a story that will appeal to the emotional intelligence of your audience.
  • How to emphasize the benefits, rather than the features, of the facts that make up the story of your complex case.

Register now and don’t miss this important free briefing!

Free One-Hour Briefing on Litigating Under Patent Local Rules: Avoiding the Pitfalls

September 30, 2014, 1:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (E.D.T.)

Fourteen years ago, the Northern District of California started an experiment: a special set of local rules to govern pretrial proceedings in patent cases. If imitation is a sign of success, then the experiment was a great success: Thirty one districts around the country have now adopted variants of the Northern District’s Patent Local Rules, and judges in other jurisdictions, such as the Central District of California, have adopted standing orders adopting the scheduling and disclosure requirements of the Patent Local Rules for their courtroom or regularly incorporate those requirements into Rule 16 scheduling orders.

Litigating under the rules can be challenging, with most courts adopting a strict approach to pre-trial disclosures that is very different from the way other civil disputes are handled under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Failure to recognize these differences and to plan ahead for complying with the rules can result in a litigant being precluded from making important substantive arguments.

Please join the chair of Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis LLP’s IP litigation group, Michael M. Carlson as he discusses:

  • The potential pitfalls of practicing under Patent Local Rules
  • The steps that must be taken to prepare for and comply with Patent Local Rules
  • The major variations in the terms of the Patent Local Rules as adopted among the districts

The discussion will be applicable to those litigating patent cases in any district that has adopted the rules or in front of any judge who has implemented them through standing or scheduling orders.

Register now and don’t miss this important free briefing!

Free One-Hour Briefing on Financial Due Diligence and the Specter of Fraud in the Private M&A Context

September 23, 2014, 1:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (E.D.T.)

In the context of private M&A transactions, where do the boundaries exist between proper negotiation and fraudulent conduct? A buyer may believe that the seller has a duty to disclose negative facts about the company, while the seller may believe that the buyer has the responsibility to ask the right questions and conduct proper due diligence to satisfy itself as to the condition of the company. Where contractual disclaimers are at play, buyers and sellers can often be at odds on who bears the ultimate risk of reliance on inaccurate information. In such cases, common law fraud may be the final arbiter of which party is ultimately deemed at fault for dashed expectations following a private company acquisition. This One-Hour Briefing will examine how common law fraud principles can govern the proper scope of seller and buyer responsibilities when due diligence and contractual protections fall short.

Michael M. Farhang of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP will address the following topics:

  • What are the common law fraud standards in two representative jurisdictions, New York and California, as applied to buyer and seller conduct in private M&A transactions?
  • What are the effects of choice-of-law provisions in private M&A agreements?
  • What impact does a contractual disclaimer have on a buyer’s reliance on alleged representations or omissions by the seller regarding the target company?
  • How do courts view the quality of a buyer’s due diligence when evaluating claims of fraud in the M&A context?
  • What are some of the policy considerations relevant to the boundaries of responsibility between sellers and buyers in the M&A context?

Register now and don’t miss this important free briefing!

Free One-Hour Briefing on Ralls Corporation v. Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States: Is This Landmark Ruling the Dawn of Due Process for CFIUS?

September 18, 2014, 1:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (E.D.T.)

In 2012, President Obama vetoed the acquisition of windfarms in Oregon by Ralls Corporation, an American company owned and controlled by two senior officials of the Sany Group, a Chinese corporation, based on their proximity to a sensitive military installation. Ralls subsequently challenged the action and the District Court dismissed the complaint. On July 15, 2014, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a landmark decision in Ralls Corporation v. Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States No. 1:12cv-01513) (July 15, 2014), reversing the District Court’s decision. The Circuit Court held that constitutional due process had been denied because Ralls was not given notice of the factual basis for the veto or given an opportunity to rebut the evidence.

This one-hour briefing will be hosted by Christopher R. Brewster and Anne W. Salladin, Special Counsel at Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP’s Washington-based National Security/CFIUS/Compliance practice. These panelists regularly represent foreign companies before CFIUS. Mr. Brewster has advised clients on CFIUS filings since passage of the Exon-Florio Amendment in 1988, including some of the largest matters considered by the Committee; Ms. Salladin is a nearly twenty year veteran of the US Department of the Treasury, the chair of CFIUS, where she provided legal advice to CFIUS and participated in the review and investigation of over 500 CFIUS cases.

The panelists will discuss the following:

  • A review of the decision
  • If upheld, implications of the decision for foreign investment in the USA
  • If upheld, implications for CFIUS procedures and
  • If upheld, implications for course and structure of deals that may affect national security

Register now and don’t miss this important free briefing!