What is the deference accorded to a trial court's discretionary ruling?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Sargon Enter.s Inc v. Univ. Of Southern, B202789, B205034, No. BC209992 (Cal. App. 2011):
The deference accorded a trial court's discretionary ruling is based on the rationale that the trial court is a presumptively more capable decisionmaker because of its "observation of... witnesses [and] superior opportunity to get the 'feel of the case.'" (Noonan v. Cunard Steamship Co. (2d Cir. 1967) 375 F.2d 69, 71 (lead opn. of Friendly,
Page 2
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
Whether a court's ruling is based on oral testimony or written declarations, when conflicting inferences can reasonably be drawn from the facts, can the appellate court defer to the trial court's factual determinations? (California, United States of America)
Is a trial court ruling that resolves conflicts in the evidence entitled to greater deference from a reviewing court than a similar finding in a similar case? (California, United States of America)
Does the "right ruling, wrong reasoning" rule apply to an evidentiary ruling that required the trial court to make findings of fact? (California, United States of America)
When a defendant makes a mid-trial motion to revoke his self represented status and have standby counsel appointed for the remainder of the trial, does the trial court have a duty to manage the trial? (California, United States of America)
When an appeal is a pure issue of law, does the Court of Appeal give deference to the trial court's ruling? (California, United States of America)
How have courts reviewed a trial court's ruling on the admissibility of evidence? (California, United States of America)
Does a court have to give deference to a prosecutor's argument that the prosecutor's credibility was compromised by the trial court? (California, United States of America)
In a motion for a new trial, is the trial court bound by the same principles as the court of appeal? (California, United States of America)
When a factual determination is challenged by an appellate court on the grounds that there is no substantial evidence to sustain it, can the appellate court substitute its deductions for those of the trial court? (California, United States of America)
Is a defendant entitled to a new trial if the trial court refuses to hear or rule on the motion? (California, United States of America)
