In re K.L.H.
Louisiana Court of Appeal
1Dissent
hDOUCET, Chief Judge,
Dissenting:
For the following reasons, I respectfully disagree with the majority in this case.
*712First, I am reminded of the primary tenet of appellate review:
In applying the manifest error-clearly wrong standard, the appellate court must determine not whether the trier of fact was right or wrong, but whether the factfinder’s conclusion was a reasonable one. Freeman [v. Poulan/Weed Eater ], 93-1530 at p. 5 [ (La.1/14/94) ], 630 So.2d [733] at 737-738; Stobarb v. State, 617 So.2d 880, 882 (La.1993); Mart v. Hill, 505 So.2d 1120, 1127 (La.1987). Where there are two permissible…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Stobart v. State Through DOTDSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1993
- Arceneaux v. DomingueSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1978
- Mart v. HillSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1987
- Sistler v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1990
- Banks v. Indus. Roofing & Sheet MetalSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1997
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.