When a factual determination is challenged by an appellate court on the grounds that there is no substantial evidence to sustain it, does the appellate court have power to substitute its deductions for those of the trial court?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from Hamrick v. Hamrick, F062903 (Cal. App. 2012):

"When a trial court's factual determination is attacked on the ground that there is no substantial evidence to sustain it, the power of an appellate court begins and ends with the determination as to whether, on the entire record, there is substantial evidence, contradicted or uncontradicted, which will support the determination, and when two or more inferences can reasonably be deduced from the facts, a reviewing court is without power to substitute its deductions for those of the trial court. If such substantial evidence be found, it is of no consequence that the trial court believing other evidence, or drawing other reasonable inferences, might have reached a contrary conclusion. [Citations.]" (Bowers v. Bernards (1984) 150 Cal.App.3d 870, 873-874, original italics.)

Other Questions


When a factual determination is challenged by an appellate court on the grounds that there is no substantial evidence to sustain it, does the appellate court have power to substitute its factual determination for that factual determination? (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)
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)
When a finding of fact is challenged on the grounds that there is no substantial evidence to sustain it, does the appellate court have any power to substitute its conclusions for those of the trial court? (California, United States of America)
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)
What is the test for an appellate court to challenge a factual determination made by a trial court? (California, United States of America)
How have courts treated "substantial evidence" in determining whether substantial evidence is sufficient? (California, United States of America)
Does a defendant have to re-weigh the evidence to determine whether the trial court abused its power to grant an order for an abuse of power? (California, United States of America)
In a motion to appeal against a jury's finding that there was no substantial evidence to support the jury's verdict, does the appellate court have any power to substitute the findings of the jury? (California, United States of America)
What is the appellate court's role in determining whether a defendant satisfied his burden of producing clear and convincing evidence in the trial court? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.