Court Opinion

ID: 9804469
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 16:49:48.330848+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:13:50.962578
License: Public Domain

McMillian, Judge,
concurring in judgment only.
While I concur with the result reached by the majority in this case, I do not agree with all that is said. Accordingly, I concur in the judgment only.10
*262Decided October 10, 2014
Samuel S. Olens, Attorney General, Kathleen M. Pacious, Deputy Attorney General, Loretta L. Pinkston, Kirsten S. Daughdril, Senior Assistant Attorneys General, Dennis, Corry, Porter & Smith, Grant B. Smith, Brent M. Estes, for appellant.
Joyce W. Bergman, for appellee.

 If an appeal is decided by a Division, a judgment in which all three judges fully concur is a binding precedent; provided, however, an opinion is physical *262precedent only with respect to any Division of the opinion for which there is a concurrence in the judgment only or a special concurrence without a statement of agreement with all that is said.
Court of Appeals Rule 33 (a).