Court Opinion

ID: 9798400
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 04:57:24.106204+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:05:29.005107
License: Public Domain

BOGGS, Circuit Judge,
concurring in the judgment only.
While I agree with the final outcome of this case based solely on Kentucky law, I do not agree with all of the reasoning in the lead opinion. In particular, it seems to treat Plambeck’s failure to maintain adequate licensure as a mere administrative quibble of no real consequence. However, the breadth of the opinion’s reasoning would seem to apply equally to far greater faults as well.
In addition, I think the specter of insurance companies lying in the weeds, making huge payouts in the hope of later recovery through fly-specking credentials, is no more than a fantasy. In this case, the insurance company paid the chiropractic bills of its insureds in good faith. Only later did the insurance company learn that some of its counterparties were unlicensed. While Kentucky law demands our outcome today, I would not gloss over the problems that this decision could create or uncover.