In their July 2022 column in this publication, titled "Concurring and Dissenting Opinions in the Court of Appeals," Thomas Newman and Steven Ahmuty express dismay that, for the past two years, about half of all of the court's decisions on the merits have included at least one concurrence or dissent. They note that "it is the majority decision, not a concurring or dissenting opinion, that determines the outcome of the case before the court and establishes the law of New York." And they reason that, because "only the majority opinion states that law," with "rare exception[s]" concurring and dissenting opinions are "meaningless" and "for naught." I respectfully dissent. In my view, the concurrences and dissents issued by the court's judges, as well as the frequency with which those separate writings are issued, provide substantial assistance to litigators practicing at all levels of the judicial system.