What is the test for overturning a finding by a jury in a motion for a new trial?

'In reviewing the trial judge's decision an appellate court is not vested with a de novo right or power such as is possessed and exercised by a trial judge. This for the very good reason that the appellate court does not have before it the witnesses to enable it to judge of their demeanor and credibility. As a consequence it is a long established rule in this state that a trial judge will not be reversed in his ruling on a motion for a new trial, unless it is affirmatively shown or manifestly appears that he has abused the sound discretion confided to him.' (Perry v. Fowler, 102 Cal.App.2d 808, 811-812, 229 P.2d 46, 48.)

Therefore, as was stated in Yarrow v. State of California, 53 Cal.2d 427, 434, 2 Cal.Rptr. 137, 140, 348 P.2d 687, 690; 'It is only where it can be said as a matter of law that there is no substantial evidence to support a contrary judgment that an appellate court will reverse an order granting a new trial on this ground. [Citations.]' (Cited in White v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., 198 A.C.A. 400, 405, 17 Cal.Rptr. 914.)

The basic question here therefore becomes: is there substantial evidence to support a contrary judgment? (Brooks v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 27 Cal.2d 305, 163 P.2d 689.) While the record arguably supports the jury's verdict, it cannot be held in this case, as a matter of law, that there is no substantial evidence which would support a contrary conclusion.