Opinion ID: 2561872
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: standard of review

Text: The [trial court's findings of fact] are reviewed on appeal under the clearly erroneous standard. A [finding of fact] is clearly erroneous when (1) the record lacks substantial evidence to support the finding, or (2) despite substantial evidence in support of the finding, the appellate court is nonetheless left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made. Substantial evidence is credible evidence which is of sufficient quality and, probative value to enable a person of reasonable caution to support a conclusion. Estate of Klink ex rel. Klink v. State, 113 Hawai`i. 332, 351, 152 P.3d 504, 523 (2007) (citations, internal quotation marks, original brackets, and ellipses omitted) (format altered).
This court reviews the [trial court's conclusions of law] de novo. A [conclusion of law] is not binding upon an appellate court and is freely reviewable for its correctness. Moreover, a [conclusion of law] that is supported by the [trial court's finding of facts] and that reflects an application of the correct rule of law will not be overturned. Hui Kako`o Aina Ho`opulapula v. Bd. of Land & Natural Res., 112 Hawai`i 28, 38, 143 P.3d 1230, 1240 (2006) (citations, internal quotation marks, and original brackets omitted).