United States V. Rojas-contreras (1985)

This refers to a majority opinion draft

Memos where a justice joins the majority opinion includes please join me; I agree; I am still with you; I acquiesce; I will go along; I dissent but will be silent; graveyard join or dissent. This code includes join of memorandum opinions if it is written by the assigned author, orders if it disposes of case, decrees, per curiam opinions. It also includes statements that the justice joins, but subject to what others might write.

This refers to a majority opinion draft

Memos where a justice joins the majority opinion includes please join me; I agree; I am still with you; I acquiesce; I will go along; I dissent but will be silent; graveyard join or dissent. This code includes join of memorandum opinions if it is written by the assigned author, orders if it disposes of case, decrees, per curiam opinions. It also includes statements that the justice joins, but subject to what others might write.

Memos where a justice joins the majority opinion includes please join me; I agree; I am still with you; I acquiesce; I will go along; I dissent but will be silent; graveyard join or dissent. This code includes join of memorandum opinions if it is written by the assigned author, orders if it disposes of case, decrees, per curiam opinions. It also includes statements that the justice joins, but subject to what others might write.

Memos where a justice joins the majority opinion includes please join me; I agree; I am still with you; I acquiesce; I will go along; I dissent but will be silent; graveyard join or dissent. This code includes join of memorandum opinions if it is written by the assigned author, orders if it disposes of case, decrees, per curiam opinions. It also includes statements that the justice joins, but subject to what others might write.

Memos where a justice joins the majority opinion includes please join me; I agree; I am still with you; I acquiesce; I will go along; I dissent but will be silent; graveyard join or dissent. This code includes join of memorandum opinions if it is written by the assigned author, orders if it disposes of case, decrees, per curiam opinions. It also includes statements that the justice joins, but subject to what others might write.

This refers to an opinion draft that concurs in the judgment or result

Memo states includes a justice's suggestion for a separate opinion (e.g., don't agree with reasoning of separate opinion; comment on separate opinion; will join separate opinion if; cannot join separate opinion; will be making suggestion to separate opinion). The identity of the separate opinion author who receives suggestion is located in the JOINED variable.

May be response to a suggestion, the majority opinion, another separate opinion; it may say the author made changes and see the attached opinion; it may indicate the opinion has been changed although not prompted by someone else

This refers to an opinion draft that concurs in the judgment or result

Memos where a justice states that they join a concurring opinion, including joining a concurrence in part, joining a concurrence in judgment or result, or joining a concurrence at foot. The identity of the concurring opinion author who receives the join is located in the JOINED variable.

Memo expresses justice's agreement with a majority opinion author's proposal, footnote, or proposed change; justice might state that he or she is open to the change

Memos where a justice states that they join a concurring opinion, including joining a concurrence in part, joining a concurrence in judgment or result, or joining a concurrence at foot. The identity of the concurring opinion author who receives the join is located in the JOINED variable.

May be response to a suggestion, reservation, or a separate opinion; may also say that author will respond to another opinion; may state majority opinion author's change to opinion that was not prompted by another justice; may indicate that the opinion is different from the conference discussion; may be a circulation of a portion of the opinion (a footnote, multiple pages without circulating the whole opinion); may be a suggestion from the majority opinion author regarding several options for changing majority opinion; may be a suggestion from the author for a change that could be made to opinion

This includes memo with broad statements including that a justice cannot join the opinion, cannot join a part of the opinion, does not agree with the opinion, or has continuing doubts with the opinion; memos that indicate that the author's change is not enough; memos that make suggestions for specific changes to majority opinion or that express reservations about some aspect of the majority opinion; this code is also given for suggestions to memorandum opinions by an assigned author

Memos where a justice states agreement with another justice's suggestion to the majority opinion author (e.g., I am about where Justice X is, agree with Justice X's letter to you, I have no problem with Justice X's suggestion, agree with another justice's comment, is Justice X's suggestion ok with you). The identity of the justice whose suggestion is endorsed is located in the JOINED variable.

Memos where a justice joins part of a majority opinion or where a justice joins all but part "X" of the majority opinion

May be response to a suggestion, reservation, or a separate opinion; may also say that author will respond to another opinion; may state majority opinion author's change to opinion that was not prompted by another justice; may indicate that the opinion is different from the conference discussion; may be a circulation of a portion of the opinion (a footnote, multiple pages without circulating the whole opinion); may be a suggestion from the majority opinion author regarding several options for changing majority opinion; may be a suggestion from the author for a change that could be made to opinion

This refers to a majority opinion draft

Memo lists cases held for an opinion and gives cert votes or votes on the merits for the held cases; justice may state that held cases should be discussed at conference