Court Opinion

ID: 9512176
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 22:11:55.083485+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:05:18.496924
License: Public Domain

JUSTICE NELSON
concurs.
¶41 I concur in the Court’s Opinion. However, had I been the trial judge I would have awarded Quick domiciliary care benefits before February 1,2007.1join the Court’s Opinion only because I was not the trial judge, and because, as an appellate judge, I am constrained to affirm the trial court’s decision by the standards of review set forth in ¶¶ 21 and 32 of the Court’s Opinion. It strikes me as being anomalous, nonetheless, that on the one hand we are affirming the trial court’s decision against Quick, but on the other we are affirming the trial court’s award of a 20% penalty against State Fund for its unreasonable conduct.
¶42 I concur.