22:
252:
may contain corrections not appearing in the bench opinion. Caution: These electronic opinions may contain computer-generated errors or other deviations from the official printed slip opinion pamphlets. Moreover, a slip opinion is replaced within a few months by a paginated version of the case in the preliminary print, and—one year after the issuance of that print—by the final version of the case in a
277:. A majority opinion sets forth the decision of the court and an explanation of the rationale behind the court's decision. Not all cases have a majority opinion. At times, the justices voting for a majority decision (e.g., to affirm or reverse the lower court's decision) may have drastically different reasons for their votes, and cannot agree on the same set of reasons. In that situation, several
251:
The "slip" opinion is the second version of an opinion. It is sent to the printer later in the day on which the "bench" opinion is released by the Court. Each slip opinion has the same elements as the bench opinion—majority or plurality opinion, concurrences or dissents, and a prefatory syllabus—but
430:
A 2011 peer-reviewed research paper suggested that judicial rulings can be swayed by extraneous variables that should have no bearing on legal decisions, such as the timing of a parole hearing in relation to the judges' meal breaks. However, a re-examination of the data found that these conclusions
399:
are those issued by a court or administrative body or panel that do not dispose of a particular case. They often address a general issue or matter, or are issued in a case that is being heard outside their jurisdiction. They are not issued for the purposes of deciding a particular case before the
382:
may not be accepted. A memorandum opinion may be issued where the law is so clearly defined that no purpose would be served by issuing an explanation as to why the law requires a certain disposition of the case before the court. In appellate courts, a memorandum opinion may indicate that the judges
312:
Normally, appellate courts (or panels) are staffed with an odd number of judges to avoid a tie. Sometimes when judicial positions are vacant or a judge has recused himself or herself from the case, the court may be stuck with a tie, in which case the lower court's decision will be affirmed without
242:
An opinion may be released in several stages of completeness. First, a bench opinion may be handed down, with the judge or panel of judges indicating their decision and a rough explanation of the reasoning underlying it. A slip opinion may also be issued the day the decision is handed down, and is
308:
should be limited or overturned. In some cases, a previous dissent is used to spur a change in the law, and a later case will write a majority opinion for the same rule of law formerly cited by the dissent. The dissent may disagree with the majority for any number of reasons: a different
256:
bound volume. In case of discrepancies between the print and electronic versions of a slip opinion, the print version controls. In case of discrepancies between the slip opinion and any later official version of the opinion, the later version
309:
interpretation of the case law, use of different principles, or a different interpretation of the facts. They are written at the same time as the majority opinion, and are often used to dispute the reasoning behind the majority opinion.
499:
495:
281:
may be written, none of which is actually the view of a majority of the members of the court. Therefore, the concurring opinion joined by the greatest number of judges is referred to as the
243:
usually not typeset or fully formatted. It is not the final or most authoritative version, being subject to further revision before being replaced with a final published edition. The
366:(or memorandum decision) is an opinion that does not create precedent of any kind in some jurisdictions. A memorandum is often brief and written only to announce
292:(or dissent) is an opinion written by one or more judges expressing disagreement with the majority opinion. A dissenting opinion does not create
351:, the majority opinion may be broken down into numbered or lettered sections. This allows judges who write an opinion "concurring in part" or "
323:
is one rendered by the court (or at least, a majority of the court) acting collectively and anonymously. In contrast to regular opinions, a
197:
327:
does not list the individual judge responsible for authoring the decision, but minority dissenting and concurring decisions are signed.
86:
645:
58:
408:
640:
358:
Opinions may also be issued in ways that limit the amount of authority that they have as precedents for future cases. In
65:
348:
244:
105:
39:
72:
230:
reached to resolve the dispute, and usually indicating the facts which led to the dispute and an analysis of the
190:
43:
54:
266:
A unanimous opinion is one in which all of the justices agree and offer one rationale for their decision.
445:
183:
355:
in part" to easily identify which parts they join with the majority, and which sections they do not.
411:
of a proposed act or policy (often in response to a request by one of the other branches government)
359:
32:
414:
helping determine the law governing a case before a court in a different jurisdiction where the
79:
253:
301:
464:
8:
317:
160:
383:
hearing the appeal find no error in the opinion being appealed to be worthy of comment.
606:
571:
547:
512:
396:
363:
352:
289:
278:
155:
150:
140:
611:
593:
552:
534:
293:
282:
145:
126:
421:
helping define how government rules and regulations are intended to be administered.
601:
583:
542:
524:
392:
270:
135:
418:
available is considered inadequate to dispose of the questions the case presents.
440:
375:
367:
223:
634:
597:
538:
415:
305:
215:
121:
588:
529:
615:
556:
336:
273:
is a judicial opinion agreed to by more than half of the members of a
344:
465:
Supreme Court of the United States information page on slip opinions
21:
484:(2nd Pocket ed.). St. Paul, MN: West Group. pp. 503, 523.
379:
340:
297:
227:
168:
371:
274:
219:
226:
in the course of resolving a legal dispute, providing the
510:
231:
572:"Overlooked factors in the analysis of parole decisions"
425:
569:
570:
Weinshall-Margel, Keren; Shapard, John (2011-10-18).
247:
issues slip opinions with the following disclaimer:
330:
46:. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
511:Danziger, S.; Levav, J.; Avnaim-Pesso, L. (2011).
403:Some circumstances where they are issued include:
300:. However, they are cited from time to time as a
632:
504:
576:Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
517:Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
479:
335:A majority opinion in countries which use the
347:by later courts. In some courts, such as the
261:
191:
386:
370:in a particular case. Depending upon local
513:"Extraneous factors in judicial decisions"
198:
184:
605:
587:
546:
528:
431:had been based on erroneous assumptions.
343:. Such decisions can usually be cited as
106:Learn how and when to remove this message
475:
473:
633:
470:
426:Factors influencing judicial opinions
313:comment by an equally divided court.
44:adding citations to reliable sources
15:
339:system becomes part of the body of
237:
13:
349:Supreme Court of the United States
245:Supreme Court of the United States
14:
657:
626:
331:Interaction with the body of law
234:used to arrive at the decision.
20:
31:needs additional citations for
563:
488:
458:
304:when arguing that the court's
1:
480:Bryan A. Garner, ed. (2001).
451:
296:nor does it become a part of
646:Common law legal terminology
360:United States legal practice
7:
446:Poetry in judicial opinions
434:
10:
662:
641:Judicial legal terminology
262:Types of judicial opinions
387:Non-adjudicative opinions
589:10.1073/pnas.1110910108
530:10.1073/pnas.1018033108
482:Black's Law Dictionary
407:helping determine the
259:
249:
302:persuasive authority
40:improve this article
400:court in question.
279:concurring opinions
500:Michigan v. Fisher
494:For examples, see
397:certified question
378:of the opinion as
364:memorandum opinion
290:dissenting opinion
156:Memorandum opinion
151:Concurring opinion
141:Dissenting opinion
55:"Judicial opinion"
523:(17): 6889–6892.
496:Bobby v. Van Hook
409:constitutionality
294:binding precedent
283:plurality opinion
208:
207:
146:Plurality opinion
127:judicial opinions
116:
115:
108:
90:
653:
627:External links
620:
619:
609:
591:
567:
561:
560:
550:
532:
508:
502:
492:
486:
485:
477:
468:
462:
393:advisory opinion
271:majority opinion
238:Drafting process
212:judicial opinion
200:
193:
186:
136:Majority opinion
118:
117:
111:
104:
100:
97:
91:
89:
48:
24:
16:
661:
660:
656:
655:
654:
652:
651:
650:
631:
630:
629:
624:
623:
568:
564:
509:
505:
493:
489:
478:
471:
463:
459:
454:
437:
428:
389:
333:
264:
240:
204:
125:
112:
101:
95:
92:
49:
47:
37:
25:
12:
11:
5:
659:
649:
648:
643:
628:
625:
622:
621:
562:
503:
487:
469:
456:
455:
453:
450:
449:
448:
443:
441:Judicial panel
436:
433:
427:
424:
423:
422:
419:
412:
388:
385:
332:
329:
263:
260:
239:
236:
224:judicial panel
206:
205:
203:
202:
195:
188:
180:
177:
176:
175:
174:
166:
158:
153:
148:
143:
138:
130:
129:
114:
113:
96:September 2016
28:
26:
19:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
658:
647:
644:
642:
639:
638:
636:
617:
613:
608:
603:
599:
595:
590:
585:
581:
577:
573:
566:
558:
554:
549:
544:
540:
536:
531:
526:
522:
518:
514:
507:
501:
497:
491:
483:
476:
474:
466:
461:
457:
447:
444:
442:
439:
438:
432:
420:
417:
416:jurisprudence
413:
410:
406:
405:
404:
401:
398:
394:
384:
381:
377:
373:
369:
365:
361:
356:
354:
350:
346:
342:
338:
328:
326:
322:
320:
314:
310:
307:
303:
299:
295:
291:
286:
284:
280:
276:
272:
267:
258:
255:
254:U. S. Reports
248:
246:
235:
233:
229:
225:
221:
218:written by a
217:
216:legal opinion
214:is a form of
213:
201:
196:
194:
189:
187:
182:
181:
179:
178:
173:
171:
167:
165:
163:
159:
157:
154:
152:
149:
147:
144:
142:
139:
137:
134:
133:
132:
131:
128:
123:
120:
119:
110:
107:
99:
88:
85:
81:
78:
74:
71:
67:
64:
60:
57: –
56:
52:
51:Find sources:
45:
41:
35:
34:
29:This article
27:
23:
18:
17:
582:(42): E833.
579:
575:
565:
520:
516:
506:
490:
481:
460:
429:
402:
390:
357:
334:
324:
318:
315:
311:
287:
268:
265:
250:
241:
211:
209:
169:
161:
102:
93:
83:
76:
69:
62:
50:
38:Please help
33:verification
30:
635:Categories
452:References
353:dissenting
337:common law
325:per curiam
319:per curiam
162:Per curiam
66:newspapers
598:0027-8424
539:0027-8424
345:precedent
257:controls.
616:21987788
557:21482790
435:See also
380:case law
376:citation
368:judgment
341:case law
321:decision
298:case law
228:decision
170:Seriatim
607:3198355
548:3084045
374:rules,
306:holding
172:opinion
164:opinion
80:scholar
614:
604:
596:
555:
545:
537:
82:
75:
68:
61:
53:
372:court
275:court
222:or a
220:judge
122:Legal
87:JSTOR
73:books
612:PMID
594:ISSN
553:PMID
535:ISSN
498:and
362:, a
124:and
59:news
602:PMC
584:doi
580:108
543:PMC
525:doi
521:108
395:or
391:An
232:law
42:by
637::
610:.
600:.
592:.
578:.
574:.
551:.
541:.
533:.
519:.
515:.
472:^
316:A
288:A
285:.
269:A
210:A
618:.
586::
559:.
527::
467:.
199:e
192:t
185:v
109:)
103:(
98:)
94:(
84:·
77:·
70:·
63:·
36:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
