Conti Appellate Opinion:
California’s appellate practice per Civil harassment com:
California's appellate practice interpretation of the "substantial evidence" standard of review adds one more word to create the phrase "any substantial evidence". That little prepended "any" appears to be the anchor of a unique self-indulging deviation from national norms of justice that unconstitutionally prefers to place facts which support the party that lost at trial in the darkest penumbra of a total eclipse.
In combination with other rules of review and court, the gross result is a massive set of California appellate opinions systemically licensed by the State to libel the party that lost at the trial level.
Simply stated, by the general practice of California appellate panels unconstitutionally takes everything said by the winning party as true and completely ignores the exculpatory evidence put on by the party that lost. California opinions are therefore heavily populated with false statements stated as fact which every reasonable trier of fact would find absurd and that even the trial judge did not find.