A concurring opinion agrees with the outcome of the court's decision but provides a wholly distinct rationale. True or False?
Understand the Problem
The question is asking whether the definition of a concurring opinion is accurate. A concurring opinion is a written opinion from one or more judges of a court which agrees with the decision made by the majority of the court, but states different (or additional) reasons as the basis for his or her decision.
Answer
False
False. A concurring opinion agrees with the outcome of the court's decision but provides a distinct rationale, not necessarily a wholly distinct one.
Answer for screen readers
False. A concurring opinion agrees with the outcome of the court's decision but provides a distinct rationale, not necessarily a wholly distinct one.
More Information
A concurring opinion is written by a judge who agrees with the final decision (outcome) but wants to clarify a specific point or offer a different legal reasoning for the judgment. It allows a judge to add their perspective to the ruling without changing the final outcome.
Tips
It is a common mistake to confuse concurring opinions with dissenting opinions. A dissenting opinion disagrees with the outcome of the ruling.
Sources
AI-generated content may contain errors. Please verify critical information
