What is the test for "substantial evidence" in a motion to challenge a verdict for lack of substantial evidence?

When a verdict is challenged for lack of substantial evidence, we must determine whether there is evidence that is " "reasonable in nature, credible, and of solid value; [constituting] substantial proof of the essentials which the law requires in a particular case." [Citations.] " ( DiMartino v. City of Orinda (2000) 80 Cal.App.4th 329, 336, 95 Cal.Rptr.2d 16.) "In evaluating the legal sufficiency of the evidence, the following basic approach is required: First, one must resolve all explicit conflicts in the evidence in favor of the respondent and presume in favor of the judgment all reasonable inferences. [Citation.] Second, one must determine whether the evidence thus marshaled is substantial. While it is commonly stated that our "power" begins and ends with a determination that there is substantial evidence

[179 Cal.Rptr.3d 727]