Boynton v. Fox West Coast Theatres Corp.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that “our function is limited to determining whether the evidence was sufficient to permit the challenged determination”
• explaining that “our function is limited to determining whether the evidence was sufficient to permit the challenged determination”
• explaining that we neither “substitute our assessment of the persua- siveness of the evidence for the juvenile court’s” nor “revisit the juvenile court’s resolution of factual disputes or its choice among reasonable inferences”
• explaining that “we view the evidence, as supplemented and buttressed by permissible derivative inferences, in the light most favorable to the trial court’s disposition and assess whether, when so viewed, the record was legally sufficient to permit that outcome”
• applying our general standard of review of factual findings in the context of a juvenile dependency case
• stating our standard of review when we decline to exercise our discretion to review de novo in an equitable case

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).