Court Opinion

views updated

COURT OPINION

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.

Term	Definition	Example
ad hoc	For this; for this purpose	Capital City Press v. Mouton, Judge ad Hoc
ad litem	For the suit; for the litigation	Estate of Langhorn v. Laws, Administrator Ad Litem
adm'r	Administrator	Grievance Adm'r v. Lange
adm'r de bonis non	Administrator of the remainder of a partially settled estate.	Vogel, Adm'r De Bonis Non v. Wells
ad valorem	According to value; a tax imposed on value of property	Aerospace Workers Inc. v. Dept. of Revenue, Division of ad Valorem Taxes
a.k.a., a/k/a	Also known as	Luis Barras, a.k.a. Luis Ramos v. State of Texas
alter ego	The 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 curiae	Friend of the court; one with an interest in the case, but not a party	Livingston v. Guice. United States of America, Amicus Curiae
appellant	Party appealing a court's decision to a higher court	Moore, Appellant v. Derwinski, Appellee
appellee	Party against whom an appeal is taken	Moore, Appellant v. Derwinski, Appellee
certiorari, cert.	Writ requiring a certified record of a case from a court	In re Petition of Johnson for a Writ of Certiorari
complainant	One who applies to a court for legal redress	Florida Bar, Complainant v. Clement, Respondent
d.b.a., d/b/a	Doing business as	M./t/L. Rendleman d.b.a. Commercial Insulators, Inc. v. Clarke
de facto	In fact; in deed; actually	McMullen, a De Facto Guardian v. Muir
defendant	Party defending against or denying allegations	Gretencord, Plaintiff v. Ford Motor Co., Defendant
defendant in error	Appellee	May v. State of Wisconsin, Defendant in Error
duces tecum	A command to produce certain evidence	In re Grand Jury Subpoena Duces Tecum
et alius, et allii, et al.	And another; and others	City of Lubbock et alius v. Knox

Term	Definition	Example
et uxor; et ux.	And wife	Kostohryz et ux. v. McGuire
et vir	And husband	Broadwater v. Dorsey et vir
ex officio	By virtue of the office	Tenneco Oil Co. v. Stephens, Ex Officio Tax Collector
ex parte	By or for one party	Ex parte Johnson
ex'r	Executor	Marilyn Haudrich as Ex'r v. Howmedica
ex relatione, ex rel.	On information or on behalf of an interested party	State ex rel. Miller v. Miller
feme sole	A single woman	Holman, Feme Sole v. Stephen F. Austin Hotel
guardian ad litem	Guardian 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 corpus	Writ commanding that a person be released from unlawful detention	In re Writ of Habeas Corpus for Martinez
in personam	Against the person	Claudio v. United States and Ken's Marine Service, Inc., in personam
in re	In the matter of	In re Estate of Lange
in rem	Against the thing; against the property	Scindia Steam Navigation Co., Ltd. v. 3,952.536 Metric Tons Peerless Eagle Coal, in rem, et al.
inter alia	Among others	Kot v. Inter alia, North East Detective Division
inter vivos	Between the living	Rudd v. Ruth inter vivos Family Trust
mandamus	Writ commanding the performance of an act or the restoration of illegally deprived rights	Ex parte Sierra Club Petition for Writ of Mandamus v. Alabama Environmental Management Commission
n.k.a., n/k/a	Now known as	Bernasek n.k.a. Staron v. Bernasek
nunc pro tunc	After a deadline and given retroactive effect	Application of West for Admission to the Bar nunc pro tunc
pendente lite	Pending the suit; during the litigation	Parsley, Administrator Pendente Lite v. Harlan
petitioner	Party filing a petition	Walton, Petitioner v. Walton, etc., et al., Respondents
plaintiff	Party bringing a civil action by filing a complaint	Oetting, Plaintiff v. United States, Defendant
plaintiff in error	Appellant	Miles, Plaintiff in Error v. Justice of the Peace Court #13
pro forma	As a matter of form	Pentecostal Church of God of America, a Pro Forma Corporation v. Hughlett
pro hac vice	For this occasion	Mohawk Assoc. and Furlough, Inc., as Owner Pro Hac Vice of the Tug Mohawk for exoneration from liability

Term	Definition	Example
pro se	For one's own behalf; appearing for oneself	Loftin, Individually, pro se v. United States
quasi	As if; analogous to	Mount Carbon Metropolitan District, a Quasi-Municipal Corporation, v. Lake George Co.
respondent	Appellee	Forehand, Petitioner v. Fogg, Respondent
sub nom	Under the name	Jones v. Lujan, sub nom. Hodel
versus, vs., v.	Against	Roe 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.