My father is proud of his footnotes. A few years ago, he broke the world's record for most footnotes in a legal article, coming in at an impressive 1,247. Soon after that, a California law professor topped my dad's record with 1,611 footnotes. My dad didn't stand for that. He wrote another legal article and just crushed his opponent. Squashed him with 4,824 footnotes, ensuring his status as the Wayne Gretzky of footnotes. My dad tried to get the Guinness Book of World Records interested, but legal footnotes apparently don't get the same respect as fingernails the size of adult rattlesnakes. So he had to settle for a mention in Harper's Index.
Has anyone (other than Arnold Jacobs) ever thought to investigate the "world record" for law review footnotes? Does anyone (besides Arnold Jacobs) think this is a worthy competition?
When I was publishing my first article, I pulled the plug on the editors at the North Carolina Law Review, who were adding ids and supras and infras in volume. My draft of the article had about 350 footnotes, and when I saw the number of footnotes proposed for addition in the initial edit, I laid down the law: NO MORE THAN 500 FOOTNOTES! It ended up with 487.
By the way, if you are interested in seeing Mr. Jacobs' article, it is An Analysis of Section 16 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 32 N. Y. L. Sch. L. Rev. 206 (1987). It is 511 pages long.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Links to weblogs that reference "The Wayne Gretzky of footnotes":