What is the standard of review for an appellate court’s decision?

An appellate court’s decision is reviewed with a standard of review. This means that the court looks at a case and decides whether a lower court was correct in its decision or if it made an error. In New Hampshire, the standard of review is based on the type of law involved in the case. Cases involving constitutional questions are reviewed de novo, meaning that the appellate court gives its own independent review of the law and facts. For other types of cases, the court uses a more limited standard of review and looks to see if the lower court properly applied the law or not. If the lower court did make an error, the appellate court will overturn the decision. Generally, the court will not review questions of fact. This means that if the lower court reached a conclusion based on its evaluation of the evidence and the witnesses, the appellate court will not second guess that decision. Therefore, the standard of review is important because it sets the framework for how an appellate court will decide a case.

Related FAQs

Are there any deadlines or limitations periods for filing an appeal?
What is the standard of proof necessary to win an appeal?
What is the process for obtaining an appellate court’s review of a jury verdict?
What is an en banc hearing and how does it differ from a typical appellate hearing?
What is the appellate court’s jurisdiction over a case?
What is the difference between a petition for rehearing and a petition for certiorari?
What is the appellate court’s scope of review for a trial court’s decision to grant or deny a motion to suppress evidence?
What is an interlocutory appeal?
What is the appellate court’s scope of review for a jury’s factual findings?
What is the time period for filing an appeal?

What is the standard of review for an appellate court’s decision?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts