Opinion ID: 2627458
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: The administrative law judge's determination

Text: In light of our determination that the preponderance-of-the evidence standard applies to administrative proceedings regarding emission-license revocations, we now address Nellis Motors' final argument: the administrative law judge inappropriately affirmed the DMV's disciplinary actions because substantial evidence did not support its findings of statutory violations by a preponderance of the evidence. We disagree. This court reviews an administrative decision for substantial evidence under an abuse of discretion standard. [14] Substantial evidence is that which `a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.' [15] This court will affirm an agency's decision unless the appellant shows that the decision prejudiced the appellant's substantial rights. [16] We will not reweigh the evidence, reassess the witnesses' credibility, or substitute the administrative law judge's judgment with our own. [17]