On-Demand   On-Demand Web Programs

Understanding the Securities Laws 2018

Released on: Jul. 27, 2018
Running Time: 12:35:39
Whether you are new to the field or seeking a quick refresher or an update, this is the securities law primer that you won’t want to miss. This program will provide an overview and discussion of the basic aspects of the U.S. federal securities laws by leading in-house and law firm practitioners as well as SEC staff.  Emphasis will be placed on the interplay among the Securities Act of 1933, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the Dodd-Frank Act, the JOBS Act, the securities related provisions of the FAST Act, related SEC regulations and significant legislative and regulatory changes and proposals.

Our expert faculty will show how securities lawyers can solve practical problems that arise in the context of public and private offerings, SEC reporting, mergers and acquisitions and other common corporate transactions.

Program Level: Basic

Intended Audience:  Attorneys with the need to expand their knowledge and keep up with all aspects of securities laws, including senior in-house attorneys, attorneys with expertise in other fields and all attorneys interested in understanding securities laws and the latest best practices.  This course is particularly beneficial for corporate associates in their early years of practice and can serve as part of a comprehensive corporate training program. It also may be suitable for other corporate, litigation and business law attorneys who handle matters in which issues under the securities laws can arise.

Prerequisites: None.

Advanced Preparation: None

Lecture Topics [Total time 12:35:39]

Segments with an asterisk (*) are available only with the purchase of the entire program.
  • Opening Remarks* [00:06:01]
    N. Adele Hogan
  • Introduction to Securities Laws [01:34:52]
    N. Adele Hogan, Kenneth L. Josselyn
  • Registering Securities Under the Securities Act of 1933 – the Skills Needed by Securities Lawyers [01:29:40]
    N. Adele Hogan, Russell Mancuso
  • Securities Act Exemptions [01:15:21]
    Anna T. Pinedo
  • Reporting Under the Exchange Act [01:03:49]
    Alice G. Givens, Richard F. Langan, Jr.
  • Liability for Securities Law Violations [01:02:26]
    Douglas I. Koff, Reed M. Brodsky
  • Liability for Corporate Executives and Officers [01:00:43]
    Bradley J. Bondi, Jennifer L. Nadborny
  • Proxy Solicitations in an Age of Corporate Activism [00:59:32]
    David K. Boston, Gillian Moldowan
  • Securities Law Aspects of Mergers, Acquisitions and Other Corporate Transactions [01:00:38]
    Dennis J. Block, June S. Dipchand
  • What’s New in Securities Law? Traps for the Unwary [01:01:57]
    Catherine M. Clarkin, Adam E. Fleisher
  • Navigating Ethics and Professionalism Requirements in Securities Law Practice [02:00:40]
    N. Adele Hogan, Ashley Gillespie, Andrew N. Siegel, Douglas K. Chia

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

  • COMPLETE COURSE HANDBOOK
  • Chapter 1: Approaching Securities Law, Practising Law Institute, Securities Law and Practice Deskbook (6th Edition)
    Gary M. Brown
  • Chapter 3: Regulatory Framework of Securities Act Registration, Practising Law Institute, Securities Law and Practice Deskbook (6th Edition)
    Gary M. Brown
  • Chapter 5: Reach of Securities Act Regulation, Practising Law Institute, Securities Law and Practice Deskbook (6th Edition)
    Gary M. Brown
  • Chapter 9: Registration and Periodic Reporting Under the Exchange Act, Practising Law Institute, Securities Law and Practice Deskbook (6th Edition)
    Gary M. Brown
  • Registering Securities Under the Securities Act of 1933 (April 2018)
    R. Cabell Morris
  • Mayer Brown LLP, Deciding Among Exempt Offering Alternatives (Chart)
    Anna T. Pinedo
  • Mayer Brown LLP, Investor Status
    Anna T. Pinedo
  • Anna T. Pinedo and James R. Tanenbaum, Ch. 2: Private Placements—An Overview, Practising Law Institute, Exempt and Hybrid Securities Offerings (3rd Edition)
    Anna T. Pinedo
  • Anna T. Pinedo and James R. Tanenbaum, Ch. 3: Rule 506 Offerings, Practising Law Institute, Exempt and Hybrid Securities Offerings (3rd Edition)
    Anna T. Pinedo
  • Anna T. Pinedo and James R. Tanenbaum, Securities Offerings and Communications: Is the Integration Bogeyman Dead?
    Anna T. Pinedo
  • Securities Act Exemptions
    Kevin E. Slaughter
  • Periodic and Other Reporting Obligations Under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (April 2018)
    Alice G. Givens, Richard F. Langan
  • Sidley Austin LLP, SEC Issues New Guidance on Cybersecurity Disclosure Requirements (March 2, 2018)
    Gary D. Gerstman
  • Douglas Koff, Kelly Koscuiszka, and Jacqueline Srour, Liability for Securities Law Violations (Substantive Outline) (May 2, 2018)
    Douglas I. Koff
  • Dangerous Liaisons: Collective Scienter in SEC Enforcement Actions, 6 N.Y.U. J. L. & Bus.1 (Fall 2009)
    Bradley J. Bondi
  • Bradley J. Bondi and Steven D. Lofchie, The Law of Insider Trading: Legal Theories, Common Defenses, and Best Practices for Ensuring Compliance, 8 N.Y.U. J. L. & Bus.151 (Fall 2011)
    Bradley J. Bondi
  • Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP, SEC Proposes Broad Clawback Rules for Executive Compensation (July 10, 2015)
    Bradley J. Bondi
  • Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP, SEC Settles with CEO for Failure to Disclose Executive Perks to Shareholders (June 2, 2017)
    Bradley J. Bondi
  • “Section 16 Insiders—Reporting and Liability”—Overview of Section 16 of the Exchange Act
    Jennifer L. Nadborny
  • Section 16, Clawbacks and Other Disgorgement Under the Federal Securities Laws (May 2, 2018)
    Lori B. Metrock
  • Regulation of Proxy Solicitation (May 2018)
    David K. Boston
  • Effectively Telling Your Executive Compensation Story as an Activist Defensive Measure (May 2, 2018)
    Gillian E. Moldowan
  • Christopher M. Hayden and Anne C. Meyer, Practical Considerations for Your First Annual Meeting (April 2018)
    Christopher M. Hayden
  • Securities Law Aspects of Mergers, Acquisitions, and Other Corporate Transactions (Substantive Outline) (April 2018)
    Dennis J. Block
  • Securities Law Aspects of Mergers, Acquisitions, and Other Corporate Transactions (New York PowerPoint slides)
    June S. Dipchand, Dennis J. Block
  • Craig T. Alcorn and Hagen J. Ganem, Securities Law Aspects of Mergers, Acquisitions and Other Corporate Transactions (Article) (May 2, 2018)
    Craig T. Alcorn
  • Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP, Alert Memorandum, Spotify’s Direct Listing—A Look Under the Hood (April 17, 2018)
    Adam E. Fleisher
  • Ethics: Selected Materials, Selected Excerpts from the New York State Rules of Professional Responsibility Effective April 1, 2009 and as Amended through May 1, 2014
    N. Adele Hogan
  • U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Public Statement, SEC Chairman Jay Clayton, Statement on Cryptocurrencies and Initial Coin Offerings (December 11, 2017)
    N. Adele Hogan
  • U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Public Statement, Divisions of Enforcement and Trading and Markets, Statement on Potentially Unlawful Online Platforms for Trading Digital Assets (March 7, 2018)
    N. Adele Hogan
  • Order Instituting Cease-and-Desist Proceedings Pursuant to Section 21C of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Making Findings, and Imposing a Cease-and-Desist Order, In the Matter of Panasonic Corporation, Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83128, Accounting and Auditing Enforcement Release No. 3938, Administrative Proceeding File No. 3-18459 (SEC April 30, 2018)
    N. Adele Hogan
  • Department of the Treasury, Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), Risk Factors for OFAC Compliance in the Securities Industry (Updated November 5, 2008)
    N. Adele Hogan

Presentation Material

  • Introduction to the U.S. Securities Laws
    Kenneth L. Josselyn
  • Securities Act Exemptions
    Anna T. Pinedo
  • The Integrated Disclosure System, Registration and Periodic Reports under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
    Alice G. Givens, Richard F. Langan, Jr.
  • Liability for Securities Law Violations
    Reed M. Brodsky, Douglas I. Koff
  • Liability for Corporate Executives and Officers
    Bradley J. Bondi, Jennifer L. Nadborny
  • Regulation of Proxy Solicitation
    David K. Boston
  • Executive Compensation Proxy Disclosure and Activism
    Gillian Moldowan
  • Securities Law Aspects of Mergers, Acquisitions and Other Corporate Transactions
    Dennis J. Block, June S. Dipchand
  • What’s New in Securities Law?
    Catherine M. Clarkin, Adam E. Fleisher
Chairperson(s)
N. Adele Hogan ~ Hogan Law Associates
Speaker(s)
Dennis J. Block ~ Greenberg Traurig, LLP
Bradley J. Bondi ~ Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP
David K. Boston ~ Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP
Reed M. Brodsky ~ Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP
Douglas K. Chia ~ Executive Director, Governance Center, The Conference Board
Catherine M. Clarkin ~ Sullivan & Cromwell LLP
June S. Dipchand ~ Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP
Adam E. Fleisher ~ Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP
Ashley Gillespie ~ Executive Director, Investment Management, Morgan Stanley
Alice G. Givens ~ Vice President-General Counsel, Chief Compliance Officer and Corporate Secretary, Ruth's Hospitality Group, Inc.
Kenneth L. Josselyn ~ Managing Director, General Counsel-Finance & Corporate, Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC
Douglas I. Koff ~ Schulte Roth & Zabel
Richard F. Langan, Jr. ~ Nixon Peabody LLP
Russell Mancuso ~ Legal Branch Chief, Division of Corporation Finance, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
Gillian Moldowan ~ Shearman & Sterling LLP
Jennifer L. Nadborny ~ Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP
Anna T. Pinedo ~ Mayer Brown LLP
Andrew N. Siegel ~ General Counsel and Chief Compliance Officer, Galaxy Digital LP
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

Understanding the Securities Laws 2019 (Chicago, IL) Sep. 18 - 19, 2019
Understanding the Securities Laws 2019 (New York, NY) Jul. 18 - 19, 2019

Handbook  Course Handbook Archive

Understanding the Securities Laws 2019  
Understanding the Securities Laws 2018 Gary M. Brown, Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP
Mark D. Wood, Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
N. Adele Hogan, Baker Tilly Virchow Krause, 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.