Any countervailing evidence that respondent did not intervene in diagnostic decisions goes to the weight of the evidence, a question strictly within the province of the fact finder. See Evans Grp., Inc. v. Foti, 2012 VT 77, ¶ 16, 192 Vt. 311, 59 A.3d 744 (leaving to factfinder issues of weight and credibility). The ALO's conclusion that respondent acted outside her license qualifications by purporting to provide a diagnosis and get the diagnosis recorded by an appropriately licensed professional was supported by this finding, and the underlying record.

The findings will stand if there is any reasonable and credible evidence to support them." (citations omitted)); see also Evans Grp., Inc. v. Foti, 2012 VT 77, ¶ 16, 192 Vt. 311, 59 A.3d 744 (holding that "trial court was within its province as factfinder to credit" one witness's testimony over another's "or to accord it more weight, and it is not for this Court to reweigh ... or otherwise retry the evidence"). Additionally, mother did not challenge below the specific expenses she now states are exaggerated, and she cannot raise that objection now.

To be considered 'in commerce,' the transaction must take place in the context of an ongoing business in which the defendant holds himself out to the public." Foti Fuels, Inc. v. Kurrle Corp., 2013 VT 111, ¶ 21, 59 A.3d 744 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). In Foti Fuels, the Vermont Supreme Court further explained that to be considered "in commerce":