\u3ci\u3eAmicus Curiae\u3c/i\u3e Brief of the Hon. Judith Fitzgerald (Bankruptcy Judge, Ret.), and Law Professors Pamela Foohey, George Kuney, Robert Lawless, Jonathan Lipson, Bruce A. Markell, Nancy Rapoport, Richard Squire, Ray Warner and Jack Williams, In Support of the Petitioner

Professor Pamela Foohey filed an amicus brief with a group of law professors and a former bankruptcy judge in MOAC Mall Holdings LLC v. Transform Holdco LLC

Learning to collaborate: Can young children develop better communication strategies through collaboration with a more popular peer

Unpopular children are known to have poor communication skills and experience difficulty in collaborative situations. This study investigated whether pairing unpopular, 5 to 6 year-old, children with a more popular peer would promote more effective collaboration. The study also investigated differences in popular and unpopular children's verbal and non-verbal communication. Thirty-six girls and 36 boys were placed in one of 12 popular, 12 unpopular or 12 mixed pairs. There were no mixed gender pairs. Children were filmed playing a collaborative game. Collaboration in popular pairs was more successful and less disputational than in unpopular pairs. Boys in unpopular pairs broke the rules of the game more often, argued more and did not monitoring their partners' facial expressions effectively. With popular partners they argued less, were more likely to elaborate disagreements, looked at their partner for longer, smiled more and were more likely to offer him a small toy. Unpopular girls' interactions were not markedly disruptive but they clearly benefited from being paired with a child with good communication skills. Popular girls modified their behaviour to take into account an unpopular partner's need for support. These findings suggest that pairing popular and unpopular children may be a useful classroom organisation strategy

Epidemics and the Politics of Knowledge: Contested Narratives in Egypt's H1N1 Response

This article explores the politics of knowledge involved in understanding and responding to epidemics in an era of global health governance and biosecurity. It develops and applies an approach focused on how multiple, competing narratives about epidemics are constructed, mobilised and interact, and selectively justify pathways of intervention and response. A detailed ethnographic case study of national and local responses to H1N1 influenza, so-called ‘swine flu’, in Egypt reveals how global narratives were reworked by powerful actors in a particular political context, suppressing and delegitimizing the alternative narratives of the Zabaleen (Coptic Christian) people whose lives and livelihoods centred on raising pigs and working with them to control urban waste. The case study illustrates important ways in which geographies and politics of blame around epidemics emerge and are justified, their political contexts and consequences, and how they may feed back to shape the dynamics of disease itself.ESR

A Coordinated Effort to Manage Soybean Rust in North America: A Success Story in Soybean Disease Monitoring

Existing crop monitoring programs determine the incidence and distribution of plant diseases and pathogens and assess the damage caused within a crop production region. These programs have traditionally used observed or predicted disease and pathogen data and environmental information to prescribe management practices that minimize crop loss (3,69). Monitoring programs are especially important for crops with broad geographic distribution or for diseases that can cause rapid and great economic losses. Successful monitoring programs have been developed for several plant diseases, including downy mildew of cucurbits, Fusarium head blight of wheat, potato late blight, and rusts of cereal crops (13,36,51,80)

Climate change litigation: a review of research on courts and litigants in climate government

Studies of climate change litigation have proliferated over the past two decades, as lawsuits across the world increasingly bring policy debates about climate change mitigation and adaptation, as well as climate change‐related loss and damage to the attention of courts. We systematically identify 130 articles on climate change litigation published in English in the law and social sciences between 2000 and 2018 to identify research trajectories. In addition to a budding interdisciplinarity in scholarly interest in climate change litigation we also document a growing understanding of the full spectrum of actors involved and implicated in climate lawsuits and the range of motivations and/or strategic imperatives underpinning their engagement with the law. Situating this within the broader academic literature on the topic we then highlight a number of cutting edge trends and opportunities for future research. Four emerging themes are explored in detail: the relationship between litigation and governance; how time and scale feature in climate litigation; the role of science; and what has been coined the “human rights turn” in climate change litigation. We highlight the limits of existing work and the need for future research—not limited to legal scholarship—to evaluate the impact of both regulatory and anti‐regulatory climate‐related lawsuits, and to explore a wider set of jurisdictions, actors and themes. Addressing these issues and questions will help to develop a deeper understanding of the conditions under which litigation will strengthen or undermine climate governance. This article is categorized under: Policy and Governance > Multilevel and Transnational Climate Change Governanc

Design and baseline characteristics of the finerenone in reducing cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in diabetic kidney disease trial

Background: Among people with diabetes, those with kidney disease have exceptionally high rates of cardiovascular (CV) morbidity and mortality and progression of their underlying kidney disease. Finerenone is a novel, nonsteroidal, selective mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist that has shown to reduce albuminuria in type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) while revealing only a low risk of hyperkalemia. However, the effect of finerenone on CV and renal outcomes has not yet been investigated in long-term trials. Patients and Methods: The Finerenone in Reducing CV Mortality and Morbidity in Diabetic Kidney Disease (FIGARO-DKD) trial aims to assess the efficacy and safety of finerenone compared to placebo at reducing clinically important CV and renal outcomes in T2D patients with CKD. FIGARO-DKD is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, event-driven trial running in 47 countries with an expected duration of approximately 6 years. FIGARO-DKD randomized 7,437 patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate >= 25 mL/min/1.73 m(2) and albuminuria (urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio >= 30 to <= 5,000 mg/g). The study has at least 90% power to detect a 20% reduction in the risk of the primary outcome (overall two-sided significance level alpha = 0.05), the composite of time to first occurrence of CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure. Conclusions: FIGARO-DKD will determine whether an optimally treated cohort of T2D patients with CKD at high risk of CV and renal events will experience cardiorenal benefits with the addition of finerenone to their treatment regimen. Trial Registration: EudraCT number: 2015-000950-39; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02545049