What does plural opinion refer to in legal contexts?

Plural opinion in legal contexts refers to situations where a majority opinion does not prevail, and as a result, multiple opinions are provided by judges, but none represent a single majority view. This typically occurs when the judges are divided, leading to various opinions that express different legal reasoning.

Choice C correctly addresses this concept since it emphasizes that a plural opinion comes into play when there is no majority opinion, resulting in the need for judges to articulate their individual viewpoints. This scenario often arises in complex cases involving nuanced issues where judges might agree on the outcome but diverge in their legal reasoning.

Other options do not accurately capture the meaning of a plural opinion. For instance, the opinion of only the highest court or a separate opinion written by a dissenting judge does not adequately encapsulate the collective nature of multiple judges expressing their views in a case without a dominant majority opinion. Similarly, an opinion agreed upon by all judges would not reflect the plurality aspect, as it implies unanimous consensus rather than a variety of opinions.