Per curiam

Definition

Per curiam is a Latin term meaning 'by the court,' used to describe a decision issued collectively by an entire court rather than by a single judge. This type of opinion usually represents the views of the court as a whole, emphasizing unity and authority in judicial decision-making. It often appears in cases that may not require extensive legal reasoning or when the ruling is straightforward and widely accepted.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. Per curiam opinions are often short and lack the detailed analysis found in majority opinions, which can make them more accessible to the public.
2. These opinions typically indicate a strong consensus among judges, suggesting that the issues at hand are clear-cut and don't require lengthy explanations.
3. In some high-profile cases, per curiam decisions can carry significant weight, shaping legal precedent without delving deeply into complex legal reasoning.
4. Per curiam rulings are common in cases where the court seeks to maintain efficiency and deliver quick justice, especially in routine matters.
5. While per curiam opinions represent the collective judgment of the court, they do not always reveal individual judicial perspectives, which may be articulated through concurring or dissenting opinions.

Review Questions

• How does a per curiam opinion differ from a majority opinion in terms of authorship and reasoning?
  • A per curiam opinion is authored collectively by the court as a whole and reflects a unified stance on an issue without attributing it to any individual judge. In contrast, a majority opinion is written by one judge or more, providing specific legal reasoning and analysis that articulates the rationale behind the court's decision. The distinction highlights how per curiam opinions tend to streamline communication and demonstrate consensus, while majority opinions allow for deeper exploration of legal arguments.
• Discuss the implications of using per curiam opinions in cases with significant public interest versus more routine matters.
  • When per curiam opinions are issued in cases with significant public interest, they can reflect a strong consensus that might influence public perception and legal precedent without extensive elaboration. This approach can expedite decisions in high-stakes situations, signaling clarity from the court. However, using per curiam opinions in routine matters helps maintain judicial efficiency and ensures that even less complex cases receive timely resolutions. The challenge lies in balancing the need for thorough explanations against the necessity for swift justice.
• Evaluate how per curiam opinions contribute to judicial authority and public trust in the court system.
  • Per curiam opinions enhance judicial authority by showcasing a unified front from the court, which can bolster public confidence in its decisions. By conveying consensus on straightforward issues, these opinions simplify complex legal matters for the general public and highlight the court's collective wisdom. This can lead to increased trust in judicial processes as citizens perceive a cohesive judiciary that prioritizes clarity and decisiveness. However, critics might argue that such brevity can obscure individual judicial thought and limit transparency, necessitating careful consideration of when to employ this form of opinion.

Related terms

Majority Opinion: The official statement of the court that reflects the view of the majority of judges participating in a case, typically providing detailed legal reasoning.

Dissenting Opinion: An opinion written by one or more judges expressing disagreement with the majority's decision, highlighting alternative interpretations of the law or facts.

Concurring Opinion: A separate opinion written by a judge who agrees with the majority's conclusion but wishes to elaborate on specific points or provide additional reasoning.