Monday, January 23, 2017

A New Resource for Teaching Transactional Business Law

Just a quick post today to alert you to a new teaching text that you may want to consider if you teach business planning or another similar offering focusing on transactional business law.  My UT Law colleagues George Kuney, Brian Krumm, and Donna Looper are coauthors of the recently released teaching text, A Transactional Matter.  The description on amazon.com follows.

A Transactional Matter gives users a summary of a basic transaction from initial choice of entity for a new venture through the harvest of that venture through a sale of substantially all its assets to an acquirer. This book allows students to get a feel for how transactional lawyering actually works―examining client objectives, legal options, client counseling, due dilligence, documentation and implementation.

This book is available in both a print version and electronic version. The e-version has live hyperlinks to the underlying transactional documents and statutes, regs, and cases. The print version will be supported by a website giving access to the same materials. Both the e-book and website of print version will feature extensive hyperlinks to source documents and legal authorities.

The three coauthors bring to this book a wealth of business law experience in a variety of contexts (from bankruptcy to general practice).   Overall, the book represents a very accessible set of teaching materials.  In fact, a student in my transaction simulation course module (which focuses on bylaw drafting) has already posted an excerpt to our class website, showing the immediate value of the text to my students (and maybe yours . . .).  If you use the book, please let me know how and how it worked for you.

[FYI, my colleagues also are coauthors of A Civil Matter, a civil procedure/litigation introduction for 1L students, in case that's more up your alley.]

[Added 1/24/2017: Here is the link to the West Academic page that Jeff Lipshaw mentions in his comment, for those who are interested.]

https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/business_law/2017/01/a-new-resource-for-teaching-transactional-business-law.html

Joan Heminway, M&A, Teaching | Permalink

Comments

The Amazon page isn't very helpful - there's a better description at West Academic.

I was interested, but it turns out it's not really a course book for a full 4 credit intro to BA. Here's a question for your readers. When Josh Fershee, Beth Miller, and I revised Unincorporated Business Entities (the Ribstein casebook), we set up with a topical approach - that is, you don't teach the entities in series - partnership to LP to LLC, etc. - but you start with an overview and then deal with each topic - management, finance, limited liability, etc. - on a comparative basis. The question is whether there's such a format yet extant for not just a UBE class but for a general BA class that includes corporations.

Posted by: Jeff Lipshaw | Jan 24, 2017 6:39:27 AM

You are right, Jeff, that this book is not a course book for a full four-credit intro to business associations law. It is not a doctrinal teaching text at all.

As to your other point on comparative topical texts for teaching business associations law, I use the casebook I co-authored to teach in the manner you suggest. I give the students a tool (a chart) that they can use to capture the comparative information as they go. I teach the course in a three-credit-hour format, so it's especially important to have this focus, given the wealth of material there is to cover.

But more pointedly, I know of no textbook that is organized around the comparative attribute format. Let's see if others respond . . . .

Posted by: joanheminway | Jan 24, 2017 6:47:49 AM

Joan, that is what I did back in 2006 at Tulane, except that I jump all around the Klein, Ramseyer, Bainbridge book. The students hated the fact that the syllabus and the book didn't match.

Posted by: Jeff Lipshaw | Jan 24, 2017 8:45:58 AM

I do not have to jump all around our book to execute on this theme. But the students are compelled, if they want to get the point, to find the comparative points themselves and synthesize and cite to the applicable sources of law. I actually think there is some value in forcing students to those tasks, even thought the students would rather that I simplify the comparison for them.

But for some, the comparative/synthesis task is likely too difficult . . . . So, I know what you mean. A teaching resource of this kind is needed. It has been needed for quite some time. That is why I developed my charts the first year I taught. Maybe we should think about drafting one . . . ?

Posted by: joanheminway | Jan 24, 2017 9:16:26 AM

Post a comment