What must a court opinion satisfy to be classified as mandatory authority?

For a court opinion to be classified as mandatory authority, it must indeed be on point and issued by a higher court. Mandatory authority refers to legal precedent that lower courts are obliged to follow. This is particularly relevant in a jurisdiction where the hierarchy of courts is clearly defined—higher courts (such as appellate courts or supreme courts) set binding precedents that must be followed by lower courts.

When an opinion is "on point," it means that the legal issues and facts in the case at hand directly align with those of the precedent. This alignment ensures that the court can rely on the principles established by the higher court in reaching its decision. In contrast, opinions from lower courts do not have the binding effect on other courts, although they may offer persuasive authority.

The requirement for unanimity in a decision is not a factor in determining mandatory authority; even a split decision from a higher court could still qualify as mandatory authority as long as the opinion is on point. Similarly, secondary authority, which may include law reviews or legal commentaries, does not hold the same weight as primary legal sources such as court opinions or statutes.