What does a concurring opinion signify?

A concurring opinion signifies that a judge agrees with the outcome of the majority's decision but has different reasoning or perspectives that they feel are important to articulate. This kind of opinion allows the judge to express specific concerns or interpretations that differ from the majority's rationale while still supporting the same conclusion. It adds nuance and depth to the judicial reasoning, which can be valuable in influencing future cases or interpreting the law.

The other options are distinct and do not accurately describe a concurring opinion. For example, another judge's disagreement with the majority reflects dissent, while abstaining from voting means that the judge does not participate in the decision at all. Writing the majority opinion indicates that the judge is taking the lead in explaining the court's primary reasoning, differing fundamentally from the concept of a concurring opinion.