Legal Definitions - AFF'D

AFF'D is an abbreviation for Affirmed. In legal proceedings, particularly within the appellate court system, "affirmed" means that a higher court has reviewed the decision of a lower court (such as a trial court or an administrative body) and has found no significant legal error that would require overturning or modifying that decision. When a judgment is affirmed, the higher court agrees with the lower court's ruling and upholds it, meaning the original decision remains in effect.

Here are a few examples illustrating how "affirmed" is used:

• Scenario: A homeowner sued a construction company for shoddy workmanship and was awarded damages by a jury in a trial court. The construction company appealed the verdict, arguing that the trial judge made an error in instructing the jury on the relevant building codes.

  Explanation: After reviewing the trial transcript, legal briefs, and the judge's instructions, the appellate court concluded that the trial judge's instructions were legally sound. The appellate court then issued a ruling stating that the trial court's judgment was "affirmed." This means the appellate court upheld the original jury verdict and the award of damages to the homeowner, finding no reversible error in the trial proceedings.

• Scenario: A state regulatory commission denied a utility company's request to raise electricity rates, citing insufficient justification for the increase. The utility company challenged this decision in an administrative court, which also sided with the commission. The utility company then appealed to a higher state court.

  Explanation: The higher state court reviewed the administrative court's findings and the regulatory commission's original decision-making process. The court determined that the commission had followed proper procedures and had a reasonable basis for denying the rate hike. Consequently, the court "affirmed" the administrative court's decision, thereby upholding the original denial of the rate increase by the regulatory commission.

• Scenario: A criminal defendant was convicted of theft after a bench trial (a trial without a jury) where the judge found the evidence presented by the prosecution to be compelling. The defendant appealed the conviction, claiming that the evidence was insufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

  Explanation: The appellate court reviewed all the evidence presented at the trial and the judge's legal reasoning. After careful consideration, the appellate court found that there was indeed sufficient evidence to support the trial judge's finding of guilt. The appellate court therefore "affirmed" the conviction, meaning the defendant's conviction for theft stands as originally decided by the trial court.