Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings

465 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• United States v. Sanders
  928 F.2d 940· 10th Cir.· 1991-03-19 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to prove the "design to conceal or disguise" element required for money laundering convictions under 18 U.S.C. § 1956(a)(1)(B)(i) for two car purchases.
• Bail Bonds BY Marvin Nelson, Inc. v. Comm'r OF the Internal Revenue Serv.
  820 F.2d 1543· 9th Cir.· 1987-07-08 ·cited 21×
  The court held that interest deductions for loans used in a scheme to create artificial tax deductions are not allowable, even if the loans themselves appear to create a legal obligation, if the transactions lack economic substance and business purpose.
• United States v. Rodriguez-Ramirez
  777 F.2d 454· 9th Cir.· 1985-11-25 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, separate convictions for distribution and possession were appropriate, claims of ineffective assistance of counsel lacked merit, and the indictment was sufficient. The court affirmed the convictions.
• Myron Durtsche, Jr. v. Am. Colloid Co.
  958 F.2d 1007· 10th Cir.· 1992-03-11 ·cited 20×
  The court held that amendments to an employee handbook attempting to reinstate at-will employment were ineffective as a matter of law because they were not conspicuous. The court also affirmed the admission of evidence regarding future damages and groundwater contamination.
• Lucien Sherrod v. Berry
  856 F.2d 802· 7th Cir.· 1988-08-22 ·cited 20×
• Jones v. Benefit Tr. Life Ins. Co.
  800 F.2d 1397· 5th Cir.· 1986-10-01 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting judgment n.o.v. on emotional distress damages, and that the jury's award should be reinstated, allowing the plaintiff to amend his prayer for relief.
• United States v. Collins
  764 F.2d 647· 9th Cir.· 1985-06-25 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the appellant's statements and financial records, and the transfer of evidence from Customs to the DEA was valid.
• United States v. Reed
  715 F.2d 870· 5th Cir.· 1983-09-12 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the defendants' convictions for conspiracy to commit extortion and interstate travel to commit extortion, and that the trial court did not err in denying their motions for acquittal or a new trial.
• United States v. Lipps
  659 F.2d 960· 9th Cir.· 1981-10-19 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the trial court erred in admitting evidence of prior convictions for impeachment, but this error was harmless as to two counts, and review of a third count was declined under the concurrent sentence doctrine.
• Pierce Packing Co. v. John Morrell & Co.
  633 F.2d 1362· 9th Cir.· 1980-12-17 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the admission of evidence of unrelated product sales was not an abuse of discretion, the jury instructions on fixed costs were proper, and the appellant's failure to timely object to predatory pricing instructions precluded review. The jury's finding that the
• Harpring v. Cont'l OIL Co.
  628 F.2d 406· 5th Cir.· 1980-10-16 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court did not err in finding that age was not the cause of Harpring's discharge and that the exclusion of certain evidence was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Picklesimer
  585 F.2d 1199· 3d Cir.· 1978-11-02 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the Controlled Substances Act does not require proof of a sufficient quantity of Schedule III drugs to have a depressant effect on the central nervous system; any quantity is proscribed. The court also held that evidence of guns found in a vehicle with drugs i
• Humphreys v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
  125 F.2d 340· 7th Cir.· 1942-01-28 ·cited 20×
  The court held that income received from protection payments, a proprietary interest in a business, and ransom money are taxable, and business expense deductions are not allowed if the taxpayer is not engaged in a legitimate business.
• Health Options, Inc. v. Palmetto Pathology Servs., P.A.
  983 So. 2d 608· Fla. 3d DCA· 2008-04-16 ·cited 19×
  Health Options, Inc. (HOI), a health maintenance organization, appeals a directed verdict finding it liable to Palmetto Pathology Services (PPS), a group of pathologists, for unpaid professional pathology services rendered to HOI members. The Florida appellate court affirmed, hol
• United States v. Foster
  939 F.2d 445· 7th Cir.· 1991-08-06 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting expert testimony regarding drug trafficking methods and a rap verse found in the defendant's notebook, as these were relevant to the defendant's knowledge and intent and were admitted with appropriat
• Pfeiffer v. Marion Ctr. Area Sch. Dist.
  917 F.2d 779· 3d Cir.· 1990-10-30 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the district court erred in excluding testimony potentially showing a double standard in dismissing a female student for premarital sex while not dismissing male students for similar conduct, and that compensatory damages are available under Title IX.
• United States v. Dudley D. Morgan, Jr.
  554 F.2d 31· 2d Cir.· 1977-04-18 ·cited 19×
• Kalvin Denny v. State
  617 So. 2d 323· Fla. 4th DCA· 1993-03-10 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the motion for mistrial, refusing to suppress the confession as fruit of illegal arrest, or refusing to suppress the second statement for Miranda violations, and did not abuse its discretion in refusing to admit codefenda
• United States v. Whalen
  940 F.2d 1027· 7th Cir.· 1991-08-14 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the government's use of the defendant's post-arrest voluntary statements was permissible impeachment, not a violation of Doyle v. Ohio, and that the exclusion of certain evidence and expert testimony was within the trial court's discretion.
• United States v. Lonedog
  929 F.2d 568· 10th Cir.· 1991-04-02 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not err in limiting cross-examination or in its rulings on alleged prosecutorial misconduct, and that any errors were harmless.
• United States v. Jackson
  836 F.2d 324· 7th Cir.· 1987-12-29 ·cited 18×
  The court held that Miranda warnings are not required in bankruptcy proceedings and that false statements regarding the location of collateral are material even if a subsequent security agreement is alleged.
• Arline M. Soderbeck v. Burnett Cnty.
  821 F.2d 446· 7th Cir.· 1987-06-15 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the county is not liable for the sheriff's actions because the sheriff is considered a state officer under Wisconsin law, not a county policymaker, and prior rulings established this precedent.
• Hale v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.
  820 F.2d 928· 8th Cir.· 1987-06-04 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the videotape demonstration and evidence of other accidents, but that the punitive damages award was excessive and required a remittitur or a new trial.
• Hogan v. Am. Tel. & Tel. Co.
  812 F.2d 409· 8th Cir.· 1987-02-23 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the exclusion of Hogan's proffered evidence of prior acts, even if erroneous, did not affect her substantial rights, and any error in admitting AT&T's opinion testimony was harmless.
• Kimbrough v. Secretary OF the United States AIR Force
  764 F.2d 1279· 9th Cir.· 1985-06-28 ·cited 18×
• United States v. DeCOITO
  764 F.2d 690· 9th Cir.· 1985-06-27 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the perjury indictment was legally sufficient and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting certain testimony or allowing jury access to exhibits.
• United States v. Kahan & Lessin Co. & Landstrom Distribs., Inc.
  695 F.2d 1122· 9th Cir.· 1982-11-12 ·cited 18×
  The court held that inadvertent intrusions into grand jury proceedings, evidentiary errors, and alleged prosecutorial misconduct did not warrant dismissal of the indictment or reversal of the conviction, as they were either nonprejudicial, harmless, or cured by instructions.
• Richardson v. McCLUNG
  559 F.2d 395· 5th Cir.· 1977-09-19 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in its evidentiary rulings or jury instructions.
• United States v. Shearn Moody, Jr.
  903 F.2d 321· 5th Cir.· 1990-05-30 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the trial court erred by prohibiting the impeachment of hearsay declarants and by denying the defendant an opportunity for surrebuttal testimony, requiring reversal and remand.
• United States v. McNEILL
  887 F.2d 448· 3d Cir.· 1989-10-11 ·cited 17×
  The court held that there was sufficient circumstantial evidence to support the conviction for solicitation and that the sentencing enhancements were properly applied.
• United States v. Williams
  875 F.2d 846· 11th Cir.· 1989-06-14 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the government is not required to characterize diverted corporate funds (e.g., as dividends) to prove a tax deficiency for conviction under 26 U.S.C.A. §§ 7201 or 7203; it must only prove the diversion and the taxpayer's willful intent. The court also affirmed
• Kalgaard v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  764 F.2d 1322· 9th Cir.· 1985-07-02 ·cited 17×
  The Tax Court's disallowance of claimed charitable contributions and imposition of additions to tax were not clearly erroneous, and sanctions were warranted for a frivolous appeal.
• United States v. Pantone
  609 F.2d 675· 3d Cir.· 1979-07-19 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the admission of extrinsic evidence to rebut general denials of wrongdoing is within the trial court's discretion, and the prior ruling in Forsythe does not control this case.
• Fla. Inst. FOR Neurologic Rehab., Inc. v. Una Marshall and Russell Lieux
  943 So. 2d 976· Fla. 2d DCA· 2006-12-08 ·cited 16×
  Florida Institute for Neurologic Rehabilitation appeals a $2.5 million wrongful death judgment, challenging the trial court's admission of a medical examiner's opinion that the death was a homicide and exclusion of law enforcement testimony. The court affirmed, holding that the t
• United States v. HUX
  940 F.2d 314· 8th Cir.· 1991-07-26 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the defendant's modified descrambler, designed solely for unauthorized access to satellite programming, falls within the prohibition of 18 U.S.C. § 2512(1)(b).
• United States v. Quinn Hickey
  917 F.2d 901· 6th Cir.· 1990-10-24 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by refusing to impose a fine, as the defendant failed to prove an inability to pay. The conviction is affirmed, but the sentence is vacated and remanded for resentencing.
• United States v. Mazzanti
  888 F.2d 1165· 7th Cir.· 1989-11-01 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in excluding evidence of a motorcycle gang, admitting rebuttal testimony regarding prior drug discussions, denying a severance motion, or refusing a multiple conspiracy instruction.
• United States v. Nedza
  880 F.2d 896· 7th Cir.· 1989-07-12 ·cited 16×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the defendant's convictions for extortion and racketeering, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in its evidentiary rulings.
• Tolan v. Levi Strauss & Co.
  867 F.2d 467· 8th Cir.· 1989-02-07 ·cited 16×
  The court held that sufficient evidence supported the jury's finding of age discrimination and willful violation of the ADEA, and that the state law claim for breach of implied covenant was timely.
• United States v. Scartz
  838 F.2d 876· 6th Cir.· 1988-02-08 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in its evidentiary rulings or in its application of the correct legal standard for determining conspiracy membership.
• Perry v. Larson
  794 F.2d 279· 7th Cir.· 1986-06-23 ·cited 16×
  The court affirmed the jury's verdict, holding that there was sufficient evidence to support findings of political retaliation, improper evidentiary rulings did not deny a fair trial, and damages were properly calculated.
• United States v. Malquist
  791 F.2d 1399· 9th Cir.· 1986-06-17 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the defendant's Fifth Amendment claims were not a valid defense to charges of willful failure to file tax returns, and that the district court did not err in its jury instructions, evidentiary rulings, or sentencing.
• United States v. Martel
  792 F.2d 630· 7th Cir.· 1986-06-05 ·cited 16×
  The court affirmed convictions, holding that evidentiary rulings were not abuses of discretion, prosecutorial conduct was harmless error or waived, and the trial court properly handled jury instructions and questions.
• In re AIR Crash Disaster Near NEW Orleans v. Turgeau
  764 F.2d 1084· 5th Cir.· 1985-06-26 ·cited 16×
  The court held that Darryl Turgeau's award for mental anguish and the award for living expenses were not supported by Louisiana law and were reversed, while Dolores Turgeau's mental anguish award was affirmed.
• ED Houser Enters., Inc. v. Gen. Motors Corp.
  595 F.2d 366· 7th Cir.· 1978-12-21 ·cited 16×
  The court held that a franchised automobile dealer failed to present sufficient evidence of coercion to support a claim under the Automobile Dealers' Day in Court Act and that challenges to a jury verdict and evidentiary rulings were improperly raised or meritless.
• United States v. Hiscott
  586 F.2d 1271· 8th Cir.· 1978-11-15 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury that the stolen vehicle must still be a part of or constitute interstate commerce at the time of the sale, not merely that it had moved in interstate commerce.
• United States v. Primitivo Cortez
  935 F.2d 135· 8th Cir.· 1991-05-30 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding expert testimony, that the Allen charge was properly given, and that the evidence was sufficient for conviction. However, it found that admitting officers' opinion testimony on a witness's truthfulness
• United States v. Rodriguez-Pando
  841 F.2d 1014· 10th Cir.· 1988-02-26 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion by excluding a statement offered to show the defendant's state of mind, as it was not hearsay when offered for that purpose.
• Sunkyong Int'l, Inc. v. Anderson Land & Livestock Co.
  828 F.2d 1245· 8th Cir.· 1987-09-04 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to submit Elizabeth Anderson's liability to the jury and that the district court properly directed a verdict against the Andersons as statutory trustees, validating prior orders through the doctrine of relation back.
• United States v. Royal
  972 F.2d 643· 5th Cir.· 1992-09-08 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the admission of certain evidence, even if erroneous, was harmless error due to overwhelming evidence of guilt, and that the defendant's sentence was properly calculated based on drug quantity as a sentencing factor.