context: Based on the foregoing, we view the two causes of action addressed by the circuit court in the instant case as equitable in nature. Therefore, this court may review the circuit court's factual findings in accordance with its own view of the preponderance of the evidence. Nonetheless, we defer to the circuit court's determinations of witness credibility.
citation_a.signal: see
citation_a.identifier: 602 S.E.2d 111, 111
citation_a.parenthetical: "However, this broad scope of review does not require this court to disregard the findings at trial or ignore the fact that the [circuit court] was in a better position to assess the credibility of the witnesses."
citation_a.sentence: See Laughon, 360 S.C. at 524-25, 602 S.E.2d at 111 (“However, this broad scope of review does not require this court to disregard the findings at trial or ignore the fact that the [circuit court] was in a better position to assess the credibility of the witnesses.”); see also Ballard, 399 S.C. at 593, 733 S.E.2d at 109 (“[T]his broad scope does not relieve the appellant of his burden to show that the trial court erred in its findings.”).
citation_b.signal: see also
citation_b.identifier: 733 S.E.2d 109, 109
citation_b.parenthetical: "[T]his broad scope does not relieve the appellant of his burden to show that the trial court erred in its findings."
citation_b.sentence: See Laughon, 360 S.C. at 524-25, 602 S.E.2d at 111 (“However, this broad scope of review does not require this court to disregard the findings at trial or ignore the fact that the [circuit court] was in a better position to assess the credibility of the witnesses.”); see also Ballard, 399 S.C. at 593, 733 S.E.2d at 109 (“[T]his broad scope does not relieve the appellant of his burden to show that the trial court erred in its findings.”).