Written interchange among appellate judges shapes and narrows final opinions

Evidence

Part of the opinion-writing process also involves responding to the draft opinions of colleagues. Typically, the response to a colleague’s opinion takes the form of a memorandum that selectively accepts some aspects of the opinion and constructively critiques others. When a judge perceives problems with an argument in a colleague’s opinion, collegiality demands that the judge should offer an alternative line of argument or a different formulation. Such a detailed critique usually cannot be conveyed orally, and thus, much of the communication among the judges on a case is in writing. In many instances this interchange enables the court to devise an opinion that all the judges can join. Failing that, the exchange of views may narrow the differences among the judges. Because so much hinges on the opinions issuing from the court, appellate judges need to be good writers. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 577

Categorization

• XREF: The judge-to-judge memorandum interchange connects to how majorities and concurrences get forged into final doctrine. — connects to: Appellate courts review lower rulings and decide by written opinions. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 571; Appellate judging is collaborative teamwork while trial judging is solitary authority — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 575; Opinion-drafting dialogue among appellate judges shapes or narrows their collective decisions — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 577 (+6 more)

Broader Connections

• Opinion-drafting dialogue among appellate judges shapes or narrows their collective decisions #expands (0.97) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 577
• Group interaction only marginally changes judges’ established voting patterns #complicates (0.80) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2623
• Judges’ attitudes cannot be reliably inferred from opinion rhetoric #complicates (0.74) — Richard A. Posner, What Has Pragmatism to Offer Law?, 120
• Judicial influence on the Supreme Court is exercised through written opinions #complicates (0.72) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 945
• Oral argument can reframe a case in ways written briefs cannot #qualifies (0.71) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1552