Which opinion agrees with the results reached by the majority but disagrees with the precise reasoning of the majority opinion?

Which opinion agrees with the results reached by the majority but disagrees with the precise reasoning of the majority opinion?

• A. Concurring opinion
• B. Dissenting opinion
• C. Plurality opinion
• D. Per curiam opinion

Answer: (A)

In appellate court writing, a concurring opinion is used when a judge agrees with the outcome reached by the majority but wants to express a different legal reasoning or emphasize additional points. It keeps the same result ruling intact while offering an alternative basis for reaching that result, which can guide future cases or clarify the limits of the majority’s reasoning. This differs from a dissenting opinion, where the judge disagrees with the outcome itself. A plurality opinion reflects the view of the largest group of justices but not a majority on the reasoning. A per curiam opinion is an unsigned decision issued by the court as a whole, often without a single author’s full reasoning.

In appellate court writing, a concurring opinion is used when a judge agrees with the outcome reached by the majority but wants to express a different legal reasoning or emphasize additional points. It keeps the same result ruling intact while offering an alternative basis for reaching that result, which can guide future cases or clarify the limits of the majority’s reasoning.

This differs from a dissenting opinion, where the judge disagrees with the outcome itself. A plurality opinion reflects the view of the largest group of justices but not a majority on the reasoning. A per curiam opinion is an unsigned decision issued by the court as a whole, often without a single author’s full reasoning.