A faithful reader has explained to me that the problem of footnotes not appearing in ipad versions of briefs (see earlier blogs) occurs only when the court rules require something other than the a pdf, like a word document, to be filed. Both the Maine SJC and the First Circuit require pdfs, so footnotes should appear on their ipad versions of briefs, This assumes that the version the court is given is the pdf version submitted by the parties to the court. I don't know what happens in those courts where they start throwing in hyperlinks before sending the brief off to the judges or clerks.
I don't think this makes using footnotes much more of a good thing. But at least with a pdf, the footnotes haven't been covered by Harry Potter's invisibility cloak.
Next - onto the federal judicial conference at the Samoset. As always, your intreprid correspondent on the scene shall report any useful appellate nuggets gleaned.