The chief justice, or the most senior justice in the majority if the chief justice is in the dissent, assigns a justice in the majority to write the opinion of the Court.
Suppose that the selected justice writes the opinion of the court which is joined by a majority of justices. However, another justice in the majority chooses to write a concurring opinion and it is also joined by a majority of justices. As a result, there are 2 opinions and both are joined (agreed to) by a majority of justices.
Would both opinions be considered majority opinions and binding precedents?