Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A dissenting opinion does not create binding precedent nor does it become a part of case law, though they can sometimes be cited as a form of persuasive authority in subsequent cases when arguing that the court's holding should be limited or overturned. In some cases, a previous dissent is used to spur a change in the law, and a later case may ...
The test, first developed in the late 20th century, is widely used in American constitutional law. [1] In short, the undue burden standard states that a legislature cannot make a particular law that is too burdensome or restrictive of one's fundamental rights. One use of the standard was in Morgan v. Virginia, 328 U.S. 373 (1946).
Catholic Bishop of Chicago, Justice William J. Brennan Jr. wrote the dissent in which he argued that if the constitutional issue is not plainly clear in the argument, courts should avoid making the decision based on constitutional questions. In such instances, he argued that courts should decide if a particular interpretation is "fairly possible."
The dissent 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. They are written at the same time as the majority opinion, and are often used to dispute the reasoning behind the majority opinion.
A grant of appellate review is dismissed as improvidently granted (DIG) when a court with discretionary appellate jurisdiction later decides that it should not review the case. [1] Notably, the Supreme Court of the United States occasionally grants a petition of the writ of certiorari, only to later DIG the case. [2]
Dissent Clark, joined by McComb Regents of the University of California , 17 Cal. 3d 425, 551 P.2d 334, 131 Cal. Rptr. 14 ( Cal. 1976), was a case in which the Supreme Court of California held that mental health professionals have a duty to protect individuals who are being threatened with bodily harm by a patient.
In law, a per curiam decision or opinion (sometimes called an unsigned opinion) is one that is not authored by or attributed to a specific judge, but rather ascribed to the entire court or panel of judges who heard the case. [1] The term per curiam is Latin for ' by the court '. [2]
In some cases, a previous dissent is used to spur a change in the law, and a later case may result in a majority opinion adopting a particular understanding of the law formerly advocated in dissent. As with concurring opinions, the difference in opinion between dissents and majority opinions can often illuminate the precise holding of the ...