A concurring opinion is a decision:

• A. Agreed on both result and rationale
• B. Agreed on the result but not the rationale
• C. Disagreed with the majority
• D. Dismissed without opinion

Answer: (B)

A concurring opinion occurs when a judge agrees with the outcome of the case but writes separately to express different reasoning or emphasis. The key idea is agreement on the result, not on the rationale used by the majority. The majority’s decision stands, but the concurring judge explains why they would reach the same outcome using their own argument or highlights aspects they think are important to stress. This is distinct from a dissent, where the judge disagrees with the outcome, and from an opinion that’s dismissed without opinion. So the description that best fits a concurring opinion is agreeing on the result but not the rationale.