Are pieces of writing influenced by multiple people more likely to be of high literary quality? Are dissenting opinions more likely to be influenced by multiple people compared to judicial decisions? This doesn’t tell us.

This doesn’t resolve the discrepancy between judicial decisions and dissenting opinions. We need to know why the latter are more frequently of high literary quality.

Since the law isn’t determined by dissenting opinions, authors of such opinions aren’t concerned about misinterpretation. They’re free to write however they like, which sometimes leads to high literary quality.

This doesn’t explain why dissenting opinions are sometimes of high literary quality. We still don't know what's different about the writing style of dissenting opinions verses judicial decisions to influence their literary quality..

This tells us nothing about dissenting opinions, nor about the writing style that judges use. We need to know why dissenting judges are more likely to write in a literary style.