What is the standard of review for a finding that a ruling made within the trial court's jurisdiction will stand?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Fogarty v. Rasbeary, 78 Cal.App.4th 1353, 93 Cal.Rptr.2d 653 (Cal. App. 2000):
At least one case has used a mixed standard, stating that a ruling made within the trial court's discretion will stand unless there is a "manifest injustice, or unless the conclusion reached in the court below does not find substantial support in the evidence." (Rouse v. Underwood (1966) 242 Cal.App.2d 316, 323.)
"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
When reviewing a challenge to a suppression ruling, how does the Court of Appeal review the factual findings of the trial court? (California, United States of America)
When reviewing a challenge to a suppression ruling, how do we review the findings of the trial court? (California, United States of America)
What is the standard of review for appellate review of a trial court ruling on the admissibility of evidence? (California, United States of America)
What is the standard of review for a motion of appeal against a finding that the trial court erred in failing to grant a new trial on the grounds of misconduct of counsel? (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)
In reviewing an order denying a motion to suppress, does the court have any authority to review the fact finding of the trial court? (California, United States of America)
What is the standard of review for appeal against a finding that a trial court's ruling on a motion of appeal was 'unlawful, arbitrary, capricious or patently absurd'? (California, United States of America)
When reviewing a ruling on a motion to exclude evidence, how do we review the findings of the trial court? (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)
How do courts review a trial court's ruling on whether an examiner's question calls for a speculative answer under the abuse of discretion standard? (California, United States of America)
