From: Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net
Lawyers' opinions are still just opinions no matter how many of them are given. A single unappealed decision by a low-level judge would be a precedent that could throw all 20 scholarly opinions out the window.
If I correctly understood what a first-year law student once told me... and if _he_ correctly understood what _he_ was told... even a Supreme Court (of the U. S.) ruling is just a set of opinions about an individual case... and all cases are different.
So, when a lawyer says "thus-and-such is the law because of thus-and- such Supreme Court ruling," this is shorthand for saying "if your particular case were taken to court, the lawyers would probably point out to the judge that there was a Supreme Court ruling in a somewhat similar case. I predict that the judge would think the opinions of a Supreme Court justices are legally sound. And I your case is similar enough that the judge will feel that their opinions pretty much apply in your case. Therefore I predict that it is very likely that the judge will rule thus-and-such way in your case."