Indiana

The trial court issued findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Indiana Trial Rule 52. Our standard of review thereon is well settled:

First, we determine whether the evidence supports the findings and second,
whether the findings support the judgment. In deference to the trial court's
proximity to the issues, we disturb the judgment only- where there is no
evidence supporting the findings or the findings fail to support the
judgment. We do not reweigh the evidence, hut consider only the evidence
favorable to the trial court's judgment. Challengers must establish that the
trial court's findings are clearly erroneous. Findings are clearly erroneous
when a review of the record leaves us firmly convinced a mistake has been
made. However, while we defer substantially to findings of fact, we do not
do so to conclusions of law. Additionally, a judgment is clearly- erroneous
under Indiana Trial Rule 52 if it relies on an incorrect legal standard. We
evaluate questions of law de novo and owe no deference to a trial court's
determination of such questions.

Carmichael v. Siegel, 754 N.II.2d 619, 625 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001) (citations omitted).