Cited by

Factual findings are clearly erroneous if, based on our review of the record, we have a “definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.” (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted).

Factual findings are clearly erroneous if, after viewing the record, this court is “left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.” (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted).

(quoting In re Lyons , ).

The referee’s reasoning for rejecting Kennedy’s testimony on the basis of credibility was robust, and we defer to the referee’s findings “when the referee’s findings rest on disputed testimony or in part on credibility, demeanor, and sincerity.” 14 (Minn. 2009) (holding that a referee may reject testimony).

And the genealogical record of citations begetting citations goes on: In re Overboe , , 867 (Minn. 2008) (accepting without analysis a referee's conclusion that "substantial experience" was an aggravating factor, citing Holker ); In re Lyons , , 636-37 (Minn. 2010) (accepting without analysis a referee's conclusion that "substantial experience" was an aggravating factor, citing Moeller and Oberhauser ); In re Waite , , 828 (Minn. 2010) (accepting without analysis a referee's conclusion that "sub

" In re Lyons , , 635 (Minn. 2010) (quoting Gjovik v. Strope , , 667 (Minn. 1987) ).

Factual findings are clearly erroneous if, after reviewing the record, we are “ ‘left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.’” ().

This standard “requires a high probability that the facts are true.”

“A referee’s findings are clearly erroneous only if we are ‘left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.’ ” ().

A finding is “clearly erroneous” when we are “left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.”

We give particular deference to the referee’s findings when those findings “rest on disputed testimony or in part on credibility, demeanor, and sincerity.”

A finding is clearly erroneous if we are “ ‘left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.’ ” ().

Making false statements is “misconduct of the highest order and warrants severe discipline.” see also *673 (characterizing making false and misleading statements to the Director as “serious”).

Making false statements is “misconduct of the highest order and warrants severe discipline.”

We defer to the referee’s findings when they “rest on disputed testimony or in part on credibility, demeanor, and sincerity.”

A finding is “clearly erroneous” if we are “left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.”

A referee’s findings are “clearly erroneous” when we are “left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.” ().

(“[Substantial experience as a lawyer may constitute an aggravating factor.”); -37 (Minn.2010).

To conclude that a referee’s findings are “clearly erroneous,” we must be “left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.”