Per curiam opinion

Definition

A per curiam opinion is a type of judicial decision issued collectively by the judges or justices of a court, without identifying any specific author. This style is often used in cases that do not require extensive legal reasoning or when the court wishes to present a unified stance on a matter. Such opinions are typically brief and focus on the judgment rather than detailed explanations, making them common in appellate processes and judicial writing.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. Per curiam opinions are commonly used by appellate courts, particularly when addressing issues that are straightforward or do not involve complex legal arguments.
2. These opinions serve to expedite the decision-making process and provide clarity without delving into detailed legal reasoning.
3. Although per curiam opinions lack individual attribution, they still carry significant authority and can set important precedents.
4. In some jurisdictions, per curiam opinions may be used to resolve procedural matters quickly without a full written opinion from each justice.
5. While most per curiam opinions are unanimous, they can also reflect a consensus among justices even when there are varying degrees of agreement.

Review Questions

• What are the advantages of using per curiam opinions in the appellate process?
  • Per curiam opinions streamline the judicial decision-making process by providing a quick and clear resolution to cases that do not require extensive discussion. They help maintain efficiency in appellate courts, allowing them to manage their caseloads effectively. Additionally, these opinions present a united front from the court, which can enhance the perceived authority of the ruling without bogging down proceedings with individual justifications.
• How do per curiam opinions compare to majority opinions in terms of content and impact on legal precedents?
  • Per curiam opinions differ from majority opinions primarily in their brevity and lack of individual authorship. While majority opinions offer detailed reasoning and rationale behind a ruling, per curiam opinions focus more on delivering a clear judgment without extensive legal discussion. Despite their concise nature, per curiam opinions can still create significant legal precedents, especially when issued by higher courts like the Supreme Court, shaping future case law even without in-depth analysis.
• Evaluate the implications of per curiam opinions for dissenting justices and their ability to express differing viewpoints within a ruling.
  • Per curiam opinions can limit the visibility of dissenting views since they do not identify individual authorship or rationale. This means that dissenting justices may find it challenging to articulate their disagreements within the context of such decisions. However, dissenting opinions remain an essential aspect of judicial discourse; they provide an avenue for justices to express their concerns about specific rulings, highlighting alternative interpretations and potential impacts on future cases. This dynamic reflects a balance between collective judicial authority and individual judicial philosophy.

Related terms

Majority Opinion: The official statement of the court that represents the views of more than half of the justices who participated in the case, providing the legal reasoning behind the decision.

Dissenting Opinion: An opinion written by one or more justices who disagree with the majority decision, offering alternative viewpoints and legal reasoning.

Judicial Review: The power of courts to assess whether a law or governmental action is in accordance with the constitution, often resulting in significant rulings that affect public policy.