Final answer:
An appellate court can only reverse a trial court's factual finding if there is a substantial error of law. The Supreme Court is the final appellate court but also has original jurisdiction in certain specific cases. Decisions of higher courts are binding on lower courts through the principle of precedent.
Step-by-step explanation:
An appellate court cannot reverse the factual finding of the trial court unless there was a substantial error of law. This is because appellate courts have appellate jurisdiction to decide the remedy and resolution of the case, based on a review of the legal, not factual, aspects that were decided by the lower courts. The Supreme Court, as the court of last resort, is the final court in which a case can be heard on appeal, and it mostly hears cases involving federal law, constitutional questions, or differing interpretations of law. However, the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in some instances as outlined by the Constitution, such as cases involving states, ambassadors, public ministers, and consuls.
In the federal court system, cases typically start at the district court level, with potential appeals moving up to the circuit courts and ultimately the Supreme Court. Decisions from higher courts are binding on lower courts, following the principle of precedent. Such reliance on precedent is a crucial part of ensuring consistency and logic in the judiciary, enhancing its legitimacy as an interpreter of the Constitution and law, despite federal judges not being elected by the populace.