of Ins., 1997 ME 226, ¶ 6, 708 A.2d 1258, 1261 (citing Nyer v. Maine Unemployment Ins. Comm’n, 601 A.2d 626, 627 (Me.1992)). “The standard of review is ‘limited to whether the [governmental agency] abused its discretion, committed an error of law, or made findings not supported by substantial evidence in the record.’ ” Davric Maine Corp. v. Maine Harness Racing Comm’n, 1999 ME 99, ¶ 7, 732 A.2d 289, 293 (citation omitted); see also CWCO, Inc., ¶ 6, 703 A.2d at 1261 (stating that, in reviewing an administrative agency decision, the issue before the court is not whether it would have reached the same conclusion as the agency, “but whether the record contains competent and substantial evidence that supports the result reached.”); Bischoff v. Bd. of Trustees, 661 A.2d 167, 170 (Me.1995) (<HOLDING>). [¶ 9] An administrative decision will be
holding law court will not overturn conclusions supported by competent and substantial evidence holding that defendants assertions of workproduct were not supported by competent evidence holding that a trial courts finding of a fraudulent lien must be supported by competent evidence holding that family courts conclusions will not be set aside if supported by findings holding that the court may not overturn the administrative law judges factual findings as long as they are supported by competent substantial evidence