Court Opinion

views updated


A statement that is prepared by a judge or court announcing the decision after a case is tried; includes a summary of the facts, a recitation of the applicable law and how it relates to the facts, the rationale supporting the decision, and a judgment; and is usually presented in writing, though occasionally an oral opinion is rendered.

Court opinions are the pronouncements of judges on the legal controversies that come before them. In a common-law system, court opinions constitute the law by which all controversies are settled. Attorneys analyze prior opinions on similar legal issues, attempting to draw parallels between their case and favorable court opinions and to distinguish unfavorable opinions. Judges study relevant opinions in rendering their decisions.

The majority of court opinions are not released for publication. Those that are released by the courts are collected in law books called reporters. Each state has at least one reporter that contains the opinions of its courts, and the nation has several reporters that contain the opinions of the federal courts.

Who's Suing Whom? Terms and Abbreviations in Case Titles

The titles of court cases frequently contain terms and abbreviations that help to indicate the nature of the dispute. The accompanying chart identifies and explains many of the terms that may appear in case titles.

ad hocFor this; for this purposeCapital City Press v. Mouton, Judge ad Hoc
ad litemFor the suit; for the litigationEstate of Langhorn v. Laws, Administrator Ad Litem
adm'rAdministratorGrievance Adm'r v. Lange
adm'r de bonis nonAdministrator of the remainder of a partially settled estate.Vogel, Adm'r De Bonis Non v. Wells
ad valoremAccording to value; a tax imposed on value of propertyAerospace Workers Inc. v. Dept. of Revenue, Division of ad Valorem Taxes
a.k.a., a/k/aAlso known asLuis Barras, a.k.a. Luis Ramos v. State of Texas
alter egoThe other self (Alter egoasserts that the defendants are one for purposes of liability)Ledford v. Mining Specialists, Inc., and Its Alter Ego, Point Mining, Inc.
amicus curiaeFriend of the court; one with an interest in the case, but not a partyLivingston v. Guice. United States of America, Amicus Curiae
appellantParty appealing a court's decision to a higher courtMoore, Appellant v. Derwinski, Appellee
appelleeParty against whom an appeal is takenMoore, Appellant v. Derwinski, Appellee
certiorari, cert.Writ requiring a certified record of a case from a courtIn re Petition of Johnson for a Writ of Certiorari
complainantOne who applies to a court for legal redressFlorida Bar, Complainant v. Clement, Respondent
d.b.a., d/b/aDoing business asM./t/L. Rendleman d.b.a. Commercial Insulators, Inc. v. Clarke
de factoIn fact; in deed; actuallyMcMullen, a De Facto Guardian v. Muir
defendantParty defending against or denying allegationsGretencord, Plaintiff v. Ford Motor Co., Defendant
defendant in errorAppelleeMay v. State of Wisconsin, Defendant in Error
duces tecumA command to produce certain evidenceIn re Grand Jury Subpoena Duces Tecum
et alius, et allii, et al.And another; and othersCity of Lubbock et alius v. Knox
et uxor; et ux.And wifeKostohryz et ux. v. McGuire
et virAnd husbandBroadwater v. Dorsey et vir
ex officioBy virtue of the officeTenneco Oil Co. v. Stephens, Ex Officio Tax Collector
ex parteBy or for one partyEx parte Johnson
ex'rExecutorMarilyn Haudrich as Ex'r v. Howmedica
ex relatione, ex rel.On information or on behalf of an interested partyState ex rel. Miller v. Miller
feme soleA single womanHolman, Feme Sole v. Stephen F. Austin Hotel
guardian ad litemGuardian for the suit or litigation (concerning an incompetent or minor)Grace M., as Guardian ad Litem for Laurie M., a Minor v. Oakland Unified School District
habeas corpusWrit commanding that a person be released from unlawful detentionIn re Writ of Habeas Corpus for Martinez
in personamAgainst the personClaudio v. United States and Ken's Marine Service, Inc., in personam
in reIn the matter ofIn re Estate of Lange
in remAgainst the thing; against the propertyScindia Steam Navigation Co., Ltd. v. 3,952.536 Metric Tons Peerless Eagle Coal, in rem, et al.
inter aliaAmong othersKot v. Inter alia, North East Detective Division
inter vivosBetween the livingRudd v. Ruth inter vivos Family Trust
mandamusWrit commanding the performance of an act or the restoration of illegally deprived rightsEx parte Sierra Club Petition for Writ of Mandamus v. Alabama Environmental Management Commission
n.k.a., n/k/aNow known asBernasek n.k.a. Staron v. Bernasek
nunc pro tuncAfter a deadline and given retroactive effectApplication of West for Admission to the Bar nunc pro tunc
pendente litePending the suit; during the litigationParsley, Administrator Pendente Lite v. Harlan
petitionerParty filing a petitionWalton, Petitioner v. Walton, etc., et al., Respondents
plaintiffParty bringing a civil action by filing a complaintOetting, Plaintiff v. United States, Defendant
plaintiff in errorAppellantMiles, Plaintiff in Error v. Justice of the Peace Court #13
pro formaAs a matter of formPentecostal Church of God of America, a Pro Forma Corporation v. Hughlett
pro hac viceFor this occasionMohawk Assoc. and Furlough, Inc., as Owner Pro Hac Vice of the Tug Mohawk for exoneration from liability
pro seFor one's own behalf; appearing for oneselfLoftin, Individually, pro se v. United States
quasiAs if; analogous toMount Carbon Metropolitan District, a Quasi-Municipal Corporation, v. Lake George Co.
respondentAppelleeForehand, Petitioner v. Fogg, Respondent
sub nomUnder the nameJones v. Lujan, sub nom. Hodel
versus, vs., v.AgainstRoe v. Wade

All published opinions are similar in format. At the top of each reporter page appears the name of the reporter preceded by the volume number. In the upper outside corner of the page is the page number. The volume, reporter name, and page number constitute the citation, which is used to locate the opinion or to refer to it. This citation may be abbreviated; for example, the citation "100 Cal. Rptr. 600" is a shorthand reference to the opinion that appears in volume 100 of the California Reporter at page 600. Many opinions are published in more than one reporter. In that situation, the additional citations are called parallel citations.

The first segment of the court opinion itself is the title of the action. It identifies the parties to the case and their roles in the action, such as plaintiff or defendant. If the opinion is from an appellate court, the party who appealed the lower court's decision is identified as appellant, and the party who is defending the lower court's decision is identified as respondent. In a criminal case, the plaintiff is usually the state prosecuting the crime—or the United States, if the federal government is prosecuting. After the title, a docket or calendar number assigned by the court appears, followed by the name of the court delivering the opinion and the date of the decision.

After this identifying information, most reporters insert a summary of the facts and the decision. In addition, some reporters classify the points of law applied by the court into individual paragraphs, called headnotes, that help the reader extract and analyze each legal concept discussed. The summary and headnotes are written by the publisher of the reporter for the convenience of the reader and are not part of the court's opinion.

The court's discussion of the case is often preceded by a syllabus, written by the court reporter, which briefly summarizes the case. After the syllabus, the court identifies the attorneys representing the parties.

Finally, the text of the opinion is presented. It usually opens with the name of the judge who wrote it. If the words per curiam or by the court appear at this point, they mean that the court chose not to identify any individual judge as the author. If the opinion is designated a memorandum opinion, it is usually a concise opinion of the entire court.

At the beginning of the opinion, the court briefly recounts the facts and issues involved in the case. Then, it delineates the applicable rules of law and explains how they relate to the facts of the case. In determining what the applicable law is, the court first looks for any relevant statutes. If no statute governs the action, the court relies on past decisions in similar cases, or precedent. If it is a case of first impression—that is, no existing statute or precedent governs the case—the court bases its opinion on similar decisions and on its own reasoning.

A court opinion may be as brief as a few sentences or as long as several hundred pages. In its course, the judge or the court may make observations or express convictions that do not contribute to the final holding in the case. These statements are called dicta and have no binding or precedential force. After the discussion of the facts and the applicable law, the opinion announces the holding, which is the legal principle or principles derived from the opinion. Only the holding is binding precedent in subsequent cases.

Each reported decision may comprise one opinion written by one judge on behalf of the entire court, or several opinions written by individuals or groups of judges. Not all the opinions in a case have the same legal force. The most significant is a majority opinion, in which a majority of the members of the court agree both with the reasoning and with the holding. A majority opinion has the most conclusive precedential value of any opinion. An opinion agreed upon by the largest number of judges but fewer than a majority of those on the court is a plurality opinion. A plurality may occur where, for example, four of nine justices join one opinion, two others write concurrences, and three write dissents. A plurality opinion constitutes the holding of the court, since it is joined by the largest number of justices, but it carries less precedential value than a majority opinion because it is not agreed upon by a majority of the court. If a judge or judges agree with the outcome of the case but not with the majority's reasoning, they may write a separate concurring opinion. Conversely, a dissenting opinion may be written by a judge or judges who disagree with the decision of the court. Neither a concurrence nor a dissent has precedential value.

The last segment of a majority or plurality opinion sets forth the judgment of the court. The judgment is the official decision of the court on the rights and claims of the parties and resolves the controversy between them. It may be a final determination, or it may remand the case (send it back) to a lower court for further action. A judgment may be completely in favor of one party, or partly in favor of one and partly in favor of another. It may be a straightforward affirmance or reversal of a lower court's decision, or it may affirm on some questions, reverse on others, and remand on still others.

further readings

Ochs, Linnea L. 1983. Legal Word Finder. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.

Statsky, William P. 2003. Introduction to Paralegalism: Perspectives, Problems, and Skills. 6th ed. Clifton Park, N.J.: Thomson/Delmar Learning.

Wren, Christopher G., and Jill R. Wren. 1999. The Legal Research Manual: A Game Plan for Legal Research and Analysis. Madison, Wis.: Legal Education.


Canons of Construction; Stare Decisis.

About this article

Court Opinion

Updated About content Print Article