<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Wordle of a Merger Agreement</title>
	<atom:link href="http://lawshucks.com/2009/02/wordle-of-a-merger-agreement/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://lawshucks.com/2009/02/wordle-of-a-merger-agreement/</link>
	<description>A self-deprecating look at life in and after BigLaw</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 14:16:15 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: DEJunkie</title>
		<link>http://lawshucks.com/2009/02/wordle-of-a-merger-agreement/#comment-295</link>
		<dc:creator>DEJunkie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Feb 2009 23:36:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lawshucks.com/?p=1008#comment-295</guid>
		<description>Agreed with Block et al. - and was surprised about STB making him a partner as well.  This case garnered a lot of bad press for the client and the law firm (again, name reference in the opinion!) and was one of the first of a spater of sponsor group vs. target cases.  Became a source of much fodder for hypothesizing how &quot;breakups&quot; in a downward trending market should be handled - and, a primer for future targets to get specific in their negotiations or else get Swedenburged. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Agreed with Block et al. &#8211; and was surprised about STB making him a partner as well.  This case garnered a lot of bad press for the client and the law firm (again, name reference in the opinion!) and was one of the first of a spater of sponsor group vs. target cases.  Became a source of much fodder for hypothesizing how &quot;breakups&quot; in a downward trending market should be handled &#8211; and, a primer for future targets to get specific in their negotiations or else get Swedenburged.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lawshucks</title>
		<link>http://lawshucks.com/2009/02/wordle-of-a-merger-agreement/#comment-291</link>
		<dc:creator>lawshucks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Feb 2009 21:10:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lawshucks.com/?p=1008#comment-291</guid>
		<description>I thought about leaving Swedenburg off the list, but he was included in the source reference.  You&#039;re not doubting that Block, Cogut, and Emmerich are heavy hitters are you? 
 
What&#039;s surprising is that Swedenburg was an associate during the negotiations yet made partner at about exactly the same time his status as a &quot;forthright negotiator&quot; was so publicly questioned.  I&#039;m kind of surprised STB didn&#039;t hold off - his testimony was a hot topic at the time.  See, e.g., &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/daily-brief/2007/12/21/entertainment-tonight-for-corporate-lawyers&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/daily-brief/...&lt;/a&gt; 
 
(By the way, were he still an associate, he&#039;d have been left off the list and we won&#039;t link to associates&#039; bios for the most part)  Not surprisingly, Swedenburg leaves this deal off his brag sheet. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I thought about leaving Swedenburg off the list, but he was included in the source reference.  You&#039;re not doubting that Block, Cogut, and Emmerich are heavy hitters are you? </p>
<p>What&#039;s surprising is that Swedenburg was an associate during the negotiations yet made partner at about exactly the same time his status as a &quot;forthright negotiator&quot; was so publicly questioned.  I&#039;m kind of surprised STB didn&#039;t hold off &#8211; his testimony was a hot topic at the time.  See, e.g., <a href="http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/daily-brief/2007/12/21/entertainment-tonight-for-corporate-lawyers" target="_blank"></a><a href="http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/daily-brief/.." rel="nofollow">http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/daily-brief/..</a>. </p>
<p>(By the way, were he still an associate, he&#039;d have been left off the list and we won&#039;t link to associates&#039; bios for the most part)  Not surprisingly, Swedenburg leaves this deal off his brag sheet.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BIgPoppa</title>
		<link>http://lawshucks.com/2009/02/wordle-of-a-merger-agreement/#comment-285</link>
		<dc:creator>BIgPoppa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Feb 2009 15:00:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lawshucks.com/?p=1008#comment-285</guid>
		<description>&quot;The BigLaw excuse: this deal is being done by some of the heaviest of hitters. &quot; If you recall, Swedenberg was the lawyer who got owned in the United Rentals/Cerberus deal. STB was representing URI and got totally crushed at trial - Chancellor Chandler even named Swedenberg in his opinion!!!  
 
&quot;With respect to URI, I find that even if the Company believed the Agreement preserved a right to specific performance, its attorney Eric Swedenburg categorically failed to communicate that understanding to the defendants during the latter part of the negotiations. &quot; </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&quot;The BigLaw excuse: this deal is being done by some of the heaviest of hitters. &quot; If you recall, Swedenberg was the lawyer who got owned in the United Rentals/Cerberus deal. STB was representing URI and got totally crushed at trial &#8211; Chancellor Chandler even named Swedenberg in his opinion!!!  </p>
<p>&quot;With respect to URI, I find that even if the Company believed the Agreement preserved a right to specific performance, its attorney Eric Swedenburg categorically failed to communicate that understanding to the defendants during the latter part of the negotiations. &quot;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
