Short answer. No. Rule 51, Section 2 requires the judgment to be rendered by the members of the court who actually participated in the deliberation on the merits of the case, before the case is assigned to one member to write the decision. A justice who joins the panel only afterward does not count as having rendered it.
What the law says
The judgment shall be rendered by the members of the court who participated in the deliberation on the merits of the case before its assignment to a member for the writing of the decision.
Rule 51, Section 2 — By whom rendered. Read the full provision →
Deliberation must precede the writing assignment
Section 2 fixes the sequence a judgment must follow. The judgment shall be rendered by the members of the court who participated in the deliberation on the merits of the case before its assignment to a member for the writing of the decision. Deliberation comes first; only afterward is one justice tasked with drafting the actual text of the decision.
Who counts as having 'rendered' the judgment
The rule ties authorship of the judgment to actual participation in deliberating the merits, not merely to whoever ends up putting pen to paper. A justice who joins the panel only after the deliberation has already happened, without having participated in it, does not fit the rule's description of who renders the judgment, even if that justice later signs the final decision that the division issues.
Why this sequencing safeguard exists
Requiring deliberation before the writing assignment ensures that the decision reflects the collective judgment of the justices who actually considered the case's merits, rather than becoming primarily the product of whichever justice happens to be assigned to draft it. The writer is expressing a decision already reached collegially, not making it alone or substituting personal views for what the panel actually agreed on.
How this connects to the unanimity requirement
This sequencing works together with Section 3's requirement that all three justices of a division participate in the deliberation and vote unanimously for a judgment to issue. Together, the two provisions ensure that by the time a decision is assigned for writing, the outcome has already been settled through genuine collective deliberation among the justices who heard the case, so the writing stage is about expressing that agreed result clearly, not shaping or second-guessing it after the fact.
What happens when a justice leaves before writing is finished
Section 2 binds the justices who actually took part in deliberating the merits to be the ones treated as having rendered the judgment, regardless of what happens to the panel's composition afterward — retirement, transfer, or incapacity of the justice assigned to write does not erase the fact that the deliberation already occurred among those participating justices. That is why the rule anchors 'rendering' the judgment to deliberation rather than to the physical act of signing the final draft, since the writer's task is administrative in a sense, translating an already-reached collective decision into a formal opinion. Where a member of the deciding division becomes unable to sign, other rules of the Court of Appeals — not Section 2 itself — address how the judgment is finalized in that situation, since Section 2 speaks only to who must have participated before writing begins.
Related provisions
- Rule 51, Section 2 — By whom rendered
- Rule 51, Section 3 — Quorum and voting in the court
- Rule 51, Section 5 — Form of decision