What is the term for an opinion written by judges who disagree with the majority?

The term for an opinion written by judges who disagree with the majority is a dissenting opinion. This type of opinion provides an alternative viewpoint and outlines the reasoning of the judges who do not agree with the decision reached by the majority. Dissenting opinions are important as they may influence future legal interpretations and offer insight into different perspectives on the law. They serve to document the disagreement and can also provide a basis for future appeals or discussions regarding changes in the law.

In contrast, a concurring opinion is written by a judge who agrees with the majority's outcome but has different reasoning. The majority opinion reflects the views of the majority of the judges and establishes the legal precedent in that case. A per curiam opinion is an unsigned opinion issued by the court as a whole, often for cases that do not require a full opinion due to their straightforward nature. Each of these types of opinions serves distinct purposes in the judicial process, but the dissenting opinion specifically captures the voices of those who oppose the majority view.