The standard asks whether reasonable minds could accept the evidence as adequate to support the conclusion. It applies to jury verdicts and administrative findings, viewing evidence favorably to the prevailing party.
It is more deferential than clear error in some applications.
Alternative Names:
Substantial Evidence Standard, Sufficiency Review
Why it Matters?
Viewing evidence favorably to the verdict winner is what makes sufficiency challenges difficult, since contrary evidence is disregarded and all reasonable inferences favor the prevailing party. The challenge succeeds only where an element lacks any supporting evidence rather than where the evidence was weak. Framing the argument element by element, identifying the specific gap, is what distinguishes a viable challenge from a reweighing request.
Frequently Confused with
Related terms
Frequently asked questions
Why are sufficiency challenges difficult?
When does the challenge succeed?
