The deal sheet that wins the interview.

A deal sheet — also called a representative matters or transactions list — is a one-to-several-page document that lists the deals you have worked on, with your role on each. For corporate and finance lawyers it is usually a separate PDF submitted alongside the CV. The difference is what each proves: a CV tells a hiring partner where you sat and what you are credentialed to do; the deal sheet shows what you actually did. For transactional laterals it is the document partners read most closely, because it answers the only question that matters in the screen — can this person do the work on our deals?

Length tracks seniority. A first- or second-year associate often has too little to fill a standalone sheet and is better folding deal bullets into the CV. A mid-level associate (third to fifth year) typically runs ten to twenty substantive deals across two to four pages. Senior associates and counsel may extend further, but curation matters more as the list grows — a tailored, shorter version usually beats an exhaustive inventory. The test is not volume; it is whether every entry is one you can discuss fluently if a partner asks.

Anonymize. If a deal has been publicly announced — a press release, an SEC filing, the firm’s own website — the headline facts are generally safe to repeat. If it has not, use a generic descriptor (‘a Fortune 500 healthcare company’, ‘an upper-middle-market PE sponsor’), a value range or no value at all, and never the terms, strategy or non-public figures. A live matter under an NDA gets its type and your role only. Under ABA Model Rule 1.6 the duty of confidentiality covers all information relating to a representation, so the safest practice is to keep two versions — a scrubbed one you send out, and a detailed one you keep private for interview prep.

They will pick one or two — usually the largest or most recent — and ask you to walk through them. The follow-ups test whether you lived the deal or merely listed it: why was it structured that way, what was the hardest point negotiated and by whom, what was the biggest open issue at signing, what did you draft and what changed between drafts, and did you deal with the client directly. Fluent, specific answers read as real experience. Vague ones read as a deal you watched. Prepare a short, structured narrative for every deal on the sheet, and remove any you cannot speak to.

Be honest, and lean on depth over volume. A sparse sheet is common for the cohort that entered corporate practice during the 2022–2024 deal slowdown, and it is not read as a personal failing when you frame it directly. Three deals described with real depth beat six pages of vague entries. Include matters that did not close (with the status noted), substantive diligence or research work, and deals from a prior role. Describe a limited role accurately rather than inflating it — a partner who later discovers an overstatement trusts you less than one who saw a modest but accurate sheet from the start.

The form changes. Litigators submit a representative matters list judged on different work — motions and briefs drafted, depositions taken or defended, hearings and trials, often paired with a writing sample. For in-house moves, the reader is frequently a general counsel or business leader weighing commercial judgment rather than deal sophistication, so the same matters are better reframed around business impact than transaction mechanics. The underlying discipline — specific, honest, confidentiality-aware descriptions of what you actually did — is the same. Before any of this, it is worth being sure the move itself is right; see our guide on whether to make a lateral move.