Dissenting opinion
| Judicial opinions |
|---|
|
Majority opinion |
A dissenting opinion (or dissent) is an opinion in a legal case written by one or more judges expressing disagreement with the majority opinion of the court which gives rise to its judgment.
A dissenting opinion does not create binding precedent or become part of case law. However, dissenting opinions are sometimes cited as persuasive authority when arguing that the court's holding should be limited or overturned. In some cases, a dissent in an earlier case is used to spur a change in the law, and a later case will write a majority opinion for the same rule of law cited by the dissent in the earlier case.
The dissenting opinion may disagree with the majority for any number of reasons: a different interpretation of the case law, use of different principles, or a different interpretation of the facts. Dissents are written at the same time as the majority opinion, and are often used to dispute the reasoning used by the majority.
A dissent in part is a dissenting opinion which disagrees only with some specific part of the majority holding. In decisions that require multi-part holdings because they involve multiple legal claims or consolidated cases, judges may write an opinion "concurring in part and dissenting in part."
- Tushnet, Mark, ed. (2008). I Dissent: Great Opposing Opinions in Landmark Supreme Court Cases. Malaysia: Beacon Press. ISBN 978-080700036-6.
[edit] See also
[edit] External links
 |
This case law article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |
