Upper-Level Courses: Three Exemplars

This Article presents three exemplars of upper-level law school classes, and is divided into three parts. Part I discusses Securitization and Asset-Backed Securities ; Part II discusses Using Transactions to Teach Secured Transactions ; and Part III discusses Teaching Deals Through a Focus on the Entertainment Industry

Upper-Level Courses: Three Examplars

I\u27m Mark Fagan, and I co-teach a course on securitization with Tamar Frankel at Boston University School of Law. We have come together to teach several interdisciplinary courses that combine law, business and public policy. Our course on securitization is a wonderful exemplar because it touches so many aspects of law as well as business and public policy. We spent quite a bit of time wrestling with how to teach it. Do you teach it in a process fashion? Do you teach it by legal topic? Do you take examples and examine them? After much debate and discussion, we actually went with the linear, process path. We begin with the borrower and show the students how the originator of the loan fits in, how they take and create a Special Purpose Vehicle ( SPV ), and the SPV in turn takes the assets and turns them into securities. We walk through this process and explain how the assets can move in one direction, and the cash in the other, and then the repayment. On the surface, this seems quite straightforward. Basically, we\u27re taking the illiquid assets and turning them into tradable securities. But, when you unbundle it, you find a level of complexity, because in addition to our primarily players, many of whom they\u27ve already had some exposure to, we get our additional players: the rating agencies, the appraisers, the security brokers, and the servicers, which layer on a very interesting dynamic into this process, because they\u27re actually not part of the core process yet have a significant impact on the outcome of the securitization process

Upper-Level Courses: Three Exemplars

This Article presents three exemplars of upper-level law school classes, and is divided into three parts. Part I discusses Securitization and Asset-Backed Securities ; Part II discusses Using Transactions to Teach Secured Transactions ; and Part III discusses Teaching Deals Through a Focus on the Entertainment Industry

Upper-Level Courses: Three Examplars

I\u27m Mark Fagan, and I co-teach a course on securitization with Tamar Frankel at Boston University School of Law. We have come together to teach several interdisciplinary courses that combine law, business and public policy. Our course on securitization is a wonderful exemplar because it touches so many aspects of law as well as business and public policy. We spent quite a bit of time wrestling with how to teach it. Do you teach it in a process fashion? Do you teach it by legal topic? Do you take examples and examine them? After much debate and discussion, we actually went with the linear, process path. We begin with the borrower and show the students how the originator of the loan fits in, how they take and create a Special Purpose Vehicle ( SPV ), and the SPV in turn takes the assets and turns them into securities. We walk through this process and explain how the assets can move in one direction, and the cash in the other, and then the repayment. On the surface, this seems quite straightforward. Basically, we\u27re taking the illiquid assets and turning them into tradable securities. But, when you unbundle it, you find a level of complexity, because in addition to our primarily players, many of whom they\u27ve already had some exposure to, we get our additional players: the rating agencies, the appraisers, the security brokers, and the servicers, which layer on a very interesting dynamic into this process, because they\u27re actually not part of the core process yet have a significant impact on the outcome of the securitization process

Panel II: Publicity Rights in Entertainment: From Second-Life to the Afterlife

Moderator: Kathy Z. Heller, Chapman University School of Law Eric Farber, Managing Shareholder of Farber & Company Attorneys. P.C. John Garon, Hamline University School of Law Kevin J. Greene, Thomas Jefferson School of Law John Tehranian, University of Utah, S.J. Quinney College of La

New insights into the genetic etiology of Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias

Characterization of the genetic landscape of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and related dementias (ADD) provides a unique opportunity for a better understanding of the associated pathophysiological processes. We performed a two-stage genome-wide association study totaling 111,326 clinically diagnosed/‘proxy’ AD cases and 677,663 controls. We found 75 risk loci, of which 42 were new at the time of analysis. Pathway enrichment analyses confirmed the involvement of amyloid/tau pathways and highlighted microglia implication. Gene prioritization in the new loci identified 31 genes that were suggestive of new genetically associated processes, including the tumor necrosis factor alpha pathway through the linear ubiquitin chain assembly complex. We also built a new genetic risk score associated with the risk of future AD/dementia or progression from mild cognitive impairment to AD/dementia. The improvement in prediction led to a 1.6- to 1.9-fold increase in AD risk from the lowest to the highest decile, in addition to effects of age and the APOE ε4 allele