Hi,
Could you please explain for me the meaning of" a dissent with three others concurring" in the following text?
The last thing Justice Fisk read was McElwayne's dissent in the case of Jeannette Baker v. Krane Chemical Corporation. It was widely assumed to be a dissent with three others concurring. The majority opinion was written by Justice Calligan. Romano was working on a concurring opinion.
What is exactly a dissent with three others concurring, and why it is assumed, taking in to account that the dissent is already written and Fisk read it.
Thanks
anonymous What is exactly a dissent with three others concurring, Three people (presumably three judges) agreed with each other about something, and a fourth person disagreed. anonymous why it is assumed, taking in to account that the dissent is already written and Fisk read it. The exact numbers of people on one side or another, at the time the opinion was voiced, was presumably not known for certain but was just assumed.
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
anonymousWhat is exactly a dissent with three others concurring,
Three people (presumably three judges) agreed with each other about something, and a fourth person disagreed.
anonymouswhy it is assumed, taking in to account that the dissent is already written and Fisk read it.
The exact numbers of people on one sid