# Menard v. Lafayette Insurance Co.

> Supreme Court of Louisiana · March 16, 2010 · 31 So. 3d 996

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9656133

## Case

- **Full name:** Shannon MENARD Et Al. v. LAFAYETTE INSURANCE COMPANY Et Al.
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Louisiana
- **Decided:** March 16, 2010
- **Citations:** 31 So. 3d 996; 2010 La. LEXIS 569; 2010 WL 1177437
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Weimer
- **Judges:** Knoll, Weimer
- **Cited by:** 146 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9656133

## Opinion text

*1012 WEIMER, J.
concurring.
|,I concur in the result and write separately to point out that I believe the majority opinion should not be construed to alter the long-standing principles that underlie application of the manifest error standard of review. Thus, while the majority correctly recognizes that where there are two reasonable explanations for an event, the one credited by the jury should not be disturbed on review, it remains equally true that “[wjhere documents or objective evidence so contradict the witness’s story, or the story itself is so internally inconsistent or implausible on its face, that a reasonable fact finder would not credit the witness’s story, the court of appeal may well find manifest error or clear wrongness even in a finding purportedly based on a credibility determination.” Rosell v. ESCO, 549 So.2d 840, 844-845 (La.1989).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9656133. Public record. Not legal advice.