on appeal unless it is unsupported by the evidence or the judge has abused his discretion.” Id. LAW/ANALYSIS I. Willful Contempt Mother raises several grounds as to how the family court erred in its finding of contempt. We have reduced those arguments to their analytical essence. At the outset, we note that because the family court was in a better position to assess the credibility and demeanor of the witnesses, we defer to the family court as to any alleged error regarding the specific factual findings. After observing these parties over the course of a three-day hearing, the family court was in a better position to evaluate their credibility and assign comparative weight to their testimony. See S.C. Dep’t of Soc. Servs. v. Mary C., 396 S.C. 15, 26, 720 S.E.2d 503, 509 (Ct. App. 2011) (<HOLDING>); Pinckney v. Warren, 344 S.C. 382, 387-88, 544
holding it is proper to defer to the family court even if conflicting evidence is presented on appeal as long as ample evidence in the record supports the family courts findings and conclusions holding that a reviewing court has the power to reject the findings and conclusions of the trial court where the findings are not supported by the evidence holding that family courts conclusions will not be set aside if supported by findings holding that the court should make factual findings from the record evidence as if it were conducting a trial on the record holding that as long as the findings are supported by substantial evidence the board must defer to the hearing committees credibility determinations because they are subsidiary findings of basic facts