Court Opinion

ID: 9597360
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 00:58:01.660718+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:25:14.458025
License: Public Domain

Concurring opinion by
Justice COOPER.
I concur in the result reached in this case but do not agree with the unnecessary dictum that suggests that KRS 342.700(1) codifies any principle of the so-called “made whole” doctrine. Ante, at 418. In fact, as we held in AIK Selective Self Insurance Fund v. Bush, 74 S.W.3d 251 (Ky.2002), the proscription against double recovery in KRS 342.700(1) precludes application of the “made whole” doctrine in the workers’ compensation context. Id. at 256-57.
ROACH, J., joins this concurring opinion.