Per Curiam Opinion in the United States

An unsigned opinion of a court. Per curiam opinions are used to briefly summarize a ruling without extensively developing the court’s reasoning. The term is Latin and translates “by the court.” See also Concurring Opinion (Apellate Judicial Process) Dissenting Opinion (Apellate Judicial Process) Majority Opinion (Apellate Judicial Process).

Analysis and Relevance

Per curiam opinions are generally used with cases that are reviewed on the merits but without oral argument. In such cases, the issue may be less involved or complicated than the issue in cases given a fuller treatment by the reviewing court. Thus a brief opinion summarily representing the decision is sufficient. Occasionally, per curiam opinions are found in very important cases. For example, in Furman v. Georgia (408 U.S. 238: 1972) the Supreme Court struck down the capital sentencing method used in Georgia. A brief per curiam opinion summarily described the decision. Individual members of the Court then entered lengthy concurring or dissenting opinions. While a majority agreed that the Georgia process was constitutionally defective, no majority existed on a rationale. Thus, the per curiam opinion was used to represent the outcome of the case, the only point on which the justices in the majority could agree. A similarly functioning per curiam opinion can be found in the Pentagon Papers case, New York Times v. United States (403 U.S. 713: 1971).

Notes and References

1. Definition of Per Curiam Opinion from the American Law Dictionary, 1991, California