What term describes the standard for overturning a decision based on factual findings in appellate court?

The term that describes the standard for overturning a decision based on factual findings in an appellate court is known as "clearly erroneous." This standard applies to cases where an appellate court reviews the factual determinations made by a lower court or jury. Under this standard, an appellate court will not overturn a lower court's findings unless it is left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.

The rationale behind this standard is that trial judges are in a better position to evaluate the credibility of witnesses and the weight of evidence presented during the trial. Thus, appellate courts typically defer to the lower court's findings unless there is a clear indication of error. This standard is pivotal in maintaining the integrity of the trial process and ensuring that reasonable judgments made at the lower level are respected unless a serious error is evident.

In contrast, the other terms relate to different standards of proof or evidentiary thresholds but do not specifically pertain to the appellate review of factual findings. For instance, "preponderance of evidence" is the standard used in civil cases to determine liability, while "beyond reasonable doubt" is the standard for criminal convictions. "Substantial evidence" refers to the amount of evidence necessary to support a conclusion, which is a