What is the test for accepting as true all evidence and all reasonable inferences from the evidence?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Samii v. Codding Enterprises, A127327 (Cal. App. 2011):
accept as true all evidence and all reasonable inferences from the evidence tending to establish the correctness of the trial court's findings and decision, resolving every conflict in favor of the judgment." (Howard v. Owens Corning (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 621, 631.)
"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
What is the test for evidence that the appellant could reasonably reasonably reasonably expect the appellant to have knowledge of a crime? (California, United States of America)
When the evidence is circumstantial, does the Court have to accept logical inferences that the jury might have drawn from the evidence? (California, United States of America)
What is a reasonable inference when it comes to conclusions that are contrary to uncontradicted evidence that reasonable people would not doubt? (California, United States of America)
What is a reasonable inference for a judge to conclude that a person who has not been convicted of a crime has committed a crime by way of reasoning? (California, United States of America)
When a conviction for sexual assault is based primarily on circumstantial evidence, does the court have to presume every fact the trier could reasonably deduce from the evidence? (California, United States of America)
Does the evidence support the finding that there was insufficient evidence to support a finding that the sexual assault charges against Backman were not supported by the weight of the evidence? (California, United States of America)
Does a competent, unconflicted counsel who submitted on the evidence at the preliminary hearing, should have argued to the trial court that this evidence did not establish the lawful duty element beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
Does a defendant have a duty to accept the only interpretation of the circumstantial evidence that "appears to be reasonable"? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for resolving conflicts in the evidence and reasonable inferences? (California, United States of America)
What is the difference between a reasonable and unreasonable plaintiff and a reasonable plaintiff under a "reasonable implied assumption of risk" approach? (California, United States of America)
