Bright-line test /brʌɪt lʌɪn tɛst/ (n.)
1. (American). A conceptual exercise bestowing a so great degree of confidence in the mind of a member of the New York bar that it cannot, as a matter of metaphysical theory, much less legal theory, exist. A bright-line test is a kind of unachievable Platonic ideal; a sunlit upland to which all US attorneys wistfully aspire, but which all know, and thank their lucky stars, they will never have to encounter in person. Thus the words “bright-line test” are always uttered in the negative, and with insincere remorse — e.g., “sadly, [[there’s no bright-line test] for this”. The logical impossibility of a bright-line test is a US attorney’s means of evading any responsibility for anything she says, does, or commits to a lengthy written memorandum of advice.
“There is no bright line test in the rules, and consequently there is always a potential risk that regulators might be inclined to take the view that your good faith practice on which your firm designed its SOX implementation might not be recharacterized as a safe harbor to Title III of Regulation G of Rule 14-a7 of the ’40 Act ...” zzzzz zzzz zzzz HEY! WAKE UP!
