PREMIUM LEGAL RESOURCES
ASK A LAWYER
CLEARLY ERRONEOUS REVIEW
Review under the clearly erroneous standard is significantly deferential, requiring a 'definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.' Concrete v. Const. Laborers, 113 S.Ct. 2264, 80 (1993).
Thus, an appellate court must accept the lower court's findings of fact unless upon review the appellate court is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed. Sawyer v. Whitley, 112 S.Ct. 2514, 22, n.14 (1992). 'If the district court's account of the evidence is plausible in light of the record viewed in its entirety, the court of appeals may not reverse it even though convinced that had it been sitting as the trier of fact, it would have weighed the evidence differently.' Anderson v. Bessemer, 470 U.S. 564, 73-4 (1985).