review

Review is the judicial examination of a lower court’s judgment by an appellate court to determine whether it was based on legal errors or, in rare cases, significant factual errors that justify reversal. If no such errors are found, the appellate court affirms the decision. The standard of review depends on the type of judgment and the court involved. Appellate courts generally review a trial court’s decisions de novo, meaning without deference to the lower court’s interpretation. Until 2024, under Chevron deference, federal circuit courts deferred to reasonable interpretations of ambiguous statutes by administrative agencies under standards set forth in the Administrative Procedure Act. The Supreme Court overruled Chevron in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024), holding that courts must exercise independent judgment in interpreting ambiguous statutes, using traditional tools of statutory construction, and may give due respect to agency interpretations without automatic deference. When a lower court acts within its discretionary authority, appellate courts typically apply the abuse of discretion standard.

[Last reviewed in August of 2025 by the Wex Definitions Team] 

Wex

• THE LEGAL PROCESS
• administrative law
• appellate procedure
• courts
• judicial administration
• statutory interpretation
• wex definitions
• courts and procedure
• legal education and practice