endnotes

[Tanaka@discussions.microsoft.com Will Tanaka]

Hello,

I am currently working on my second draft of my legal research paper and I
have a major problem with endnotes. In my current endnote section, I have
many sources that cite to previous primary sources so I use the terms "Id."
or "see supra" to indicate see above sources. On my redraft, I am placing
new sources in between the first source I cite in full and the short cites.
For example, in my first draft I have the following:

1 Christopher M. Larkins, Judicial Independence and Democratization: A
Theoretical and Conceptual Analysis, 44 Am. J. Comp. L. 605, 608 (1996).

2. Id. at 4. (which refers to the source directly above)

3. Id. at 5.

In my second draft, I would like to place new sources, for ex., between #1
and #2. When I do place the new source, the Id. at 4 won't refer to the
correct source.

My question is, is there anyway to keep track of the short cite (e.g. "Id.
at 4") so I know what they refer to without too much manual work?

I hope my question is clear.

Thank you,

[Daiya Mitchell]

This is a very unfamiliar style to me--I assume some legal research guide
prescribes it? I know that "ibid" in the humanities style is only accurate
for completely sequential notes, the second but nonsequential reference to a
source would be a shortened form of the "author, title, page number." So I
think you will have to delete and change the "Id" no matter what.

If you could write instead, "see note 1," then inserting a cross-reference
to the footnote number, via Insert | Cross-Reference, or Insert | Reference,
depending on version, would work. (just be aware that, as you inserted new
notes, the cross-references will not update until you manually Update Fields
by selecting and hitting F9.) But that may not fit your style guide.

Theoretically you could bookmark each author that you cite, and then use a
cross-reference to the bookmark for following notes, but I think that would
be far more work than going through the notes copying and pasting, and it
still wouldn't put in Id where appropriate.

So....I don't think you can get Word do this for you. Third-party
bibliographic software (e.g. EndNote, PRoCite, Reference Manager) would do
it, though they require setup. Free thirty-day demos, though.

--
Daiya Mitchell, MVP Mac/Word
Word FAQ: http://www.word.mvps.org/
MacWord Tips: <http://www.word.mvps.org/MacWordNew/>
What's an MVP? A volunteer! Read the FAQ: http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/

[Joseph McGuire]

I have never found an elegant solution to this problem. My experience with
the blue book (later the white book) is limited to writing appellate briefs,
where, of course, nobody's briefs get bounced because a judge's law clerk
thinks you did not hew rigidly enough to these arcane requirements. Law
review editors, of course, are different.. Merely cross-referencing the
end notes to each other does not really answer the "Id." problem in Word. A
not-very-elegant way to do it is to ignore the problem (denial is a critical
legal skill) until your text is in final form. Then you can go back and fix
the Id cites that don't actually refer to the previous endnote. Not pretty,
of course, but nobody reading your fine work will know what you did!

Another alternative, which I cannot guarantee will satisfy the White book
police: Give your target citation (the one the Ids would refer to) a name,
e.g., Erie R.R. and use it as a shorthand instead if Id., as in "Erie at 356
n.4"

Hope this helps a little.

"Will Tanaka" <Will Tan...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0352C891-AF9C-4B6D...@microsoft.com...