In some cases, a particular judge will agree with the judgment reached in the majority opinion, but for different reasons. In this situation, the judge can write a separate written opinion – known as a concurring opinion – explaining the differing reasons for his or her vote. Although it is the majority opinion that becomes law, the concurring opinion can nonetheless provide helpful insight into the mindset of particular judges on the court. (See also "Opinion," "Majority Opinion").
Agrees with the majority opinion, but gives different or added reasons for arriving at that opinion.
an opinion that agrees with the court's disposition of the case but is written to express a particular judge's reasoning
an opinion by one or more judges that agrees with the decision of the majority but offers further comment or a different reason for the decision
A judge's written opinion wherein he or she agrees with the finding of the majority but disagrees with their rationale.
An opinion by a member of a court that agrees with the result reached in a case but offers its own rationale for the decision.
A written opinion of an appellate court in which the writing judge agrees with the decision reached by the majority of the judges, but uses different legal reasoning to reach that decision, and writes a separate opinion describing that reasoning.
In law, a concurring opinion is a written opinion by some of the judges of a court which agrees with the opinion of the majority of the court but might arrive there in a different manner.