January 18, 2010
"bottomheavy" legal writingJoan Magat at Duke has written an article on the problem of Bottomheavy: Legal Footnotes . Yes, I can hear many legal writing professors cheering. Here's her abstract:
"For decades, legal footnotes have been the deserving target of both ample criticism and self-mockery. Apart from their complaints as to footnotes’ mere existence, most critics draw a bead on the ballooning of footnote content. Some journal editors, aspiring to respond to this sound theme, hopefully inform their authors of a preference for “light footnoting.” But where does an author begin to trim, and what editor has the audacity to slash what the author (or her research assistant) has so laboriously compiled below the line? Changing our footnote habits is about benefits and costs. To gain the former, we must ante up. If criticism began the round of bidding, this article modestly raises the stakes, suggesting a rule of reason that might govern the author’s, the editor’s, and the reader’s expectations for footnotes. A gamble, perhaps, but one that might be worth taking. "
January 18, 2010 | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference "bottomheavy" legal writing: