What is a Per Curiam Verdict and What Are the Criticisms
Often times trials are concluded. One party comes out on the short end of the stick. Appeals to the higher court are undertaken and after long and laborious time obtaining a transcript and pain-stakingly researching the law. The attorney waits one or two years awaiting on the higher court. The attorney thereupon in hopes and aspirations of his clients freedom only receives an opinion that reads: “Per Curiam Affirmed.” What a let down. The parties are generally precluded from moving on to a higher court and there is no expression of what went wrong. These verdicts raise more frustration by the attorneys involved and rightfully so. Just think about this and the problems such verdicts create. All at the hands of an appellate court. Verdicts which could otherwise be expressed for all clarity to all of the public. Noting just a few problems of the a per curiam verdict.
Erosion of Judicial Accountability and Credibility
A central criticism of per curiam opinions is that they undermine the individualized nature of the American common law system by shielding individual judges from public
accountability State v. McKinley, 234 W. Va. 143. Because published and attributed opinions with publicly recorded votes are the primary mechanism for holding appellate jurists accountable, unsigned opinions frustrate this process State v. McKinley, 234 W. Va. 143. Furthermore, per curiam decisions may damage the credibility of the judiciary if the public perceives them as strategic or political tools used to maintain secrecy State v. McKinley, 234 W. Va. 143. This lack of individual judicial accountability is particularly concerning in jurisdictions where judges are elected State v. McKinley, 234 W. Va. 143. The question becomes has the judge simply shielded his or herself from accountability to the public and all for relection? The public might logically perceive such verdicts in this manner.
In Florida there was a move years ago from the private bench through the Legislature to direct an amendment to the rules requiring a written opinion and prohibiting a per curiam verdict. It did not succeed. The Florida Bar responded declaring the Legislature could not intrude on the Bar procedures.
Absence of Precedential Value and Legal Development
Courts and commentators criticize per curiam affirmances without written opinions because they lack any precedential value and do not establish principles of law Ford Motor Co. v. Hetsler, 2026 Fla. App. LEXIS 5881, Vachon v. Travelers Home & Marine Ins. Co., 403 So. 3d 451, Harmon v. Barton, 894 F.2d 1268, Dep't of Legal Affairs v. Dist. Court of Appeal, 434 So. 2d 310. While they may establish the law of the case or support a plea of res judicata between the original parties, they do not bind appellate courts in subsequent, unrelated cases Vachon v. Travelers Home & Marine Ins. Co., 403 So. 3d 451, Harmon v. Barton, 894 F.2d 1268, Dep't of Legal Affairs v. Dist. Court of Appeal, 434 So. 2d 310. Consequently, the widespread use of these unsigned, unwritten decisions is criticized for inhibiting the overall development of the law State v. McKinley, 234 W. Va.
Speculation and Lack of Guidance
Because a per curiam affirmance without an opinion does not reveal the rationale for the disposition, the basis for the decision is always subject to speculation Ford Motor Co. v. Hetsler, 2026 Fla. App. LEXIS 5881. Trial courts and attorneys are left to speculate as to the underlying reasoning of the appellate court when attempting to understand the ruling Vachon v. Travelers Home & Marine Ins. Co., 403 So. 3d 451. A per curiam affirmance can be issued for numerous non-substantive reasons, such as a party's failure to preserve an error, which further demonstrates why they fail to provide reliable legal guidance Whitely v. Am. Integrity Ins. Co., 249 So. 3d 1312.
Reduced Quality and Coherence of Decisions
In the absence of an individually responsible authoring judge, the reasoning of a per curiam opinion risks being disjointed and incoherent State v. McKinley, 234 W. Va. 143. This lack of individual ownership may result in lower-quality judicial opinions and diminish the consequences for judges who fail to adequately perform their own work State v. McKinley, 234 W. Va. 143.
Perception of Superficial Review
Per curiam affirmances without written opinions can engender a negative perception among the bar and the public, leaving appellate counsel with the unfounded impression that the court gave the case superficial treatment or "did not read the briefs" Elliott v. Elliott, 648 So. 2d 137. Although courts maintain that these dispositions are necessary due to the high volume of appeals and are reserved for well-settled points of law, the lack of a written explanation continues to fuel dissatisfaction and distrust regarding the thoroughness of the appellate review Elliott v. Elliott, 648 So. 2d 137.
In trial, your attorney has really one good shot before a jury. Otherwise, he is at the whim of an appellate court. When a Per Curiam decision is rendered, that safeguard for an appeal is limited or vanishes. At our firm, we take the greatest lengths to at least seek to extend that safety value by creating a comprehensive record for the appeal. While we cant assure you success on appeal, we are prepared here to do all that is potentially prospective below with the concept that you need not appeal. Good luck.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey W. Wiggs, Esq.
307 N. Barrow Ave.
Tavares, Fl. 32778
Ph: (352) 253-0100
Comments