You would say that: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a|devil|}}A nascent theory of professional legal practice. | {{a|devil|}}A nascent theory of professional legal practice. | ||
A private practitioner’s greatest fear a [[bright line test|bright-line]]. You | A private practitioner’s greatest fear is a [[bright line test|bright-line]]. You can’t ''do'' anything with a bright line: it just sits there, unambiguously demarcating boundaries, dispassionately indicating what is ''in'' and what is ''out''. | ||
You can't vacillate around it. There are no penumbras, no degrees of shade, no room for pause, for careful contemplation of remote but feasible phantoms loitering in dark recesses. You’re either one side or the other. | |||
Lawyers ''like'' to vacillate. That is why they turn up. Any opportunity to to blur the edges of old white line is an opportunity to extemporise on a client dine whilst taking little or no risk and whilst subjecting oneself to little or no criticism. | |||
So, for example, we are told that institutional big boy letters should be effective at disclaiming liability for prospectuses at least when selling too sophisticated institutional clients. | So, for example, we are told that institutional big boy letters should be effective at disclaiming liability for prospectuses at least when selling too sophisticated institutional clients. | ||
| Line 7: | Line 11: | ||
{{Sa}} | {{Sa}} | ||
*[[Qiix]] | *[[Qiix]] | ||
[[Bright line test]] | |||
*[[Big-boy letter]] | *[[Big-boy letter]] | ||
[[Inclined]] to be [[supportive]] | [[Inclined]] to be [[supportive]] | ||
Revision as of 21:31, 12 November 2022
|
|
A nascent theory of professional legal practice.
A private practitioner’s greatest fear is a bright-line. You can’t do anything with a bright line: it just sits there, unambiguously demarcating boundaries, dispassionately indicating what is in and what is out.
You can't vacillate around it. There are no penumbras, no degrees of shade, no room for pause, for careful contemplation of remote but feasible phantoms loitering in dark recesses. You’re either one side or the other.
Lawyers like to vacillate. That is why they turn up. Any opportunity to to blur the edges of old white line is an opportunity to extemporise on a client dine whilst taking little or no risk and whilst subjecting oneself to little or no criticism.
So, for example, we are told that institutional big boy letters should be effective at disclaiming liability for prospectuses at least when selling too sophisticated institutional clients.
See also
Inclined to be supportive