MARK TUBRE Vs. AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA AND TRISTAR RISK MANAGEMENT
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
MARK TUBRE * NO. 2014-CA-0859 VERSUS * COURT OF APPEAL AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA AND TRISTAR RISK MANAGEMENT * FOURTH CIRCUIT * STATE OF LOUISIANA * * ******* BAGNERIS, J., CONCURS WITH REASONS. When factual findings are based on the credibility of witnesses, the fact finder’s decision to credit a witness’s testimony must be given great deference by the appellate court. Rosell v. ESCO, 549 So.2d 840, 844 (La. 1989). Furthermore, when two permissible views of the evidence exists, the fact finder’s choice between them cannot be manifestly erroneous or clearly wrong. Id. at 845. Based on this standard of review, we are compelled to affirm the judgment. Accordingly, I must concur in the result reached.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
