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

• Bouman v. Block
  940 F.2d 1211· 9th Cir.· 1991-07-23 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed the district court's findings on timely filing, standing, and most discrimination claims, but remanded for further findings on specific issues including policy authority, back pay, punitive damages, and attorney's fees.
• United States v. Chan Yu-Chong
  920 F.2d 594· 9th Cir.· 1990-12-06 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the seized heroin and unidentified powder constituted a 'mixture or substance' for sentencing purposes, the sentencing scheme based on quantity was constitutional, and prosecutorial comments and evidence of prior bad acts did not warrant reversal.
• United States v. Lutrell Davis
  876 F.2d 71· 9th Cir.· 1989-05-31 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court did not err in refusing the defendant's proposed jury instructions, admitting certain testimony, or excluding defense exhibits, and properly denied the motion for acquittal.
• United States v. Komisaruk
  885 F.2d 490· 9th Cir.· 1989-05-10 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court did not err in precluding evidence of international law, necessity, or crime prevention as defenses to the charge of willfully damaging government property, nor in refusing a jury instruction on trespass as a lesser included offense.
• The Prudential Ins. Co. OF Am. v. Miller Brewing Co.
  789 F.2d 1269· 7th Cir.· 1986-05-06 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the insurance policy was unambiguous and Miller was liable for the full premium as determined by the policy terms, as there was no mutual mistake or bad faith by Prudential.
• United States v. Devine
  787 F.2d 1086· 7th Cir.· 1986-03-31 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the exclusion of a linguist's testimony regarding tape recordings was not an abuse of discretion and did not deny the defendant a fair trial. The court also rejected other claims of error.
• United States v. O'Leary
  739 F.2d 135· 3d Cir.· 1984-07-19 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting testimony about prior drug transactions under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) because it was relevant for permissible purposes and its probative value was not substantially outweighed by unfair prejudic
• Borough OF Lansdale v. Philadelphia Elec. Co.
  692 F.2d 307· 3d Cir.· 1982-11-08 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the determination of the relevant geographic market in an antitrust case involving an electric utility is a question of fact for the jury, not a matter of law for the court, and that the jury's finding of no monopoly power was supported by sufficient evidence.
• Jasper Hollis Rosemund v. United States
  386 F.2d 412· 10th Cir.· 1967-12-08 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the admission of marked currency, even if altered, is permissible if the trial court finds it is in substantially the same condition and properly identified.
• Rash Moore, Jr. v. Stephens
  271 F.2d 119· 6th Cir.· 1959-10-28 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the appellant waived the right to assign error regarding the jury instruction on the last-clear-chance doctrine by failing to object before the jury retired.
• Davis v. State
  207 So. 3d 177· Fla.· 2016-11-10 ·cited 13×
  Leon Davis Jr. was convicted of two counts of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for the December 2007 murders of Dashrath and Pravinkumar Patel during an attempted armed robbery at a BP gas station in Polk County. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the convictions and de
• Donton v. State
  1 So. 3d 1092· Fla. 1st DCA· 2009-01-08 ·cited 13×
  Lee Donton was convicted by jury of sexual battery upon a mentally defective victim (a teenager with severe autism and retardation) at a juvenile detention facility. On appeal, Donton challenged the admission of Williams Rule evidence of a prior child molestation, the sufficiency
• Agro AIR Assocs., Inc. v. Houston Cas. Co.
  128 F.3d 1452· 11th Cir.· 1997-11-21 ·cited 13×
  Agro Air Associates sued Houston Casualty Company for fraud, alleging that Houston commingled its hull and liability insurance (HLI) policy with extended loss of use insurance (LOUI) policy despite agreeing to keep them separate, causing Agro to face dramatically higher insurance
• Cedar Hammock Fire Dep't & Fla. League of Cities v. Bonami
  672 So. 2d 892· Fla. 1st DCA· 1996-05-07 ·cited 13×
  In a workers' compensation appeal, the First District Court of Appeal reversed a judge's exclusion of vocational counselor testimony regarding a claimant's permanent total disability, finding the exclusion constituted an abuse of discretion where the claimant failed to demonstrat
• Jones v. State
  908 So. 2d 615· Fla. 4th DCA· 2005-08-24 ·cited 12×
  William Daniel Jones was convicted of solicitation to commit second degree murder following a jury trial and sentenced to fifteen years in prison. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed the conviction, holding that solicitation to commit second degree murder does not exist
• Jens Peter Hansen v. State
  585 So. 2d 1056· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-09-04 ·cited 12×
  Hansen appeals his conviction for first-degree murder and burglary, arguing the trial court made erroneous evidentiary rulings regarding his insanity defense. The court affirms the conviction and life sentence, finding the trial judge properly managed the admission of evidence an
• United States v. Denny
  939 F.2d 1449· 10th Cir.· 1991-07-29 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict the defendant of violating the bank bribery statute, the admission of expert testimony was not an abuse of discretion, and the jury instructions were proper.
• United States v. Degaglia
  913 F.2d 372· 7th Cir.· 1990-09-13 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the tape recording of a conversation, despite challenges to its authentication and the suggestiveness of the voice identification procedures, and affirmed the conviction.
• Hyster Co. v. Stephens
  560 So. 2d 1334· Fla. 1st DCA· 1990-05-03 ·cited 12×
  Hyster appealed a jury verdict awarding the Stephens $700,000 in damages for injuries sustained when a forklift transmission allegedly jumped into gear due to design and manufacturing defects. The court affirmed, finding that a jury issue existed as to whether the product defect
• United States v. Weddell
  890 F.2d 106· 8th Cir.· 1989-11-28 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting testimony of prior bad acts, as it was relevant to intent and self-defense and its probative value outweighed its prejudicial effect.
• Fisher v. Judge James J. Krajewski
  873 F.2d 1057· 7th Cir.· 1989-05-02 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the jury verdict and denial of a new trial, holding that the magistrate did not abuse discretion in excluding evidence of prior rulings and contempt findings, and that the jury instructions were proper.
• United States v. Segall
  833 F.2d 144· 9th Cir.· 1987-11-23 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the three counts of making false statements were not multiplicitous, and the admission of testimony regarding fund withdrawals was not an abuse of discretion.
• Adams v. Fuqua Indus., Inc.
  820 F.2d 271· 8th Cir.· 1987-06-04 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by excluding Fuqua's rebuttal evidence regarding the feasibility of safety features, materially prejudicing Fuqua's defense.
• United States v. Pizarro
  756 F.2d 579· 7th Cir.· 1985-03-07 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting Pizarro's statement, excluding co-defendant's testimony, or in its rulings on prosecutorial comments, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction.
• United States v. Castell
  584 F.2d 87· 5th Cir.· 1978-11-15 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in excluding evidence of the witness's prior conduct and in giving a jury instruction regarding possession of recently stolen property.
• United States v. Wyers
  546 F.2d 599· 5th Cir.· 1977-01-26 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the conviction, finding no reversible error in the jury selection, speedy trial, prosecutorial questioning, or sufficiency of evidence claims.
• United States v. Jones
  514 F.2d 648· 5th Cir.· 1975-06-13 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction and that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence or in its instructions to the jury.
• English v. State
  43 So. 3d 871· Fla. 5th DCA· 2010-09-03 ·cited 11×
  The court held that while the trial court erred in admitting a BOLO dispatch, the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt because the victim had already provided the same description and there was overwhelming evidence of guilt.
• Hobart Corp. v. Siegle
  600 So. 2d 503· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-06-09 ·cited 11×
  Hobart Corporation appeals a jury verdict in a products liability action where a minor suffered hand injuries from a commercial food grinder. The Third District affirmed the judgment, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in evidentiary rulings or jury instruc
• Willco Kuwait (Trading) S.A.K. v. Peter J. deSAVARY
  843 F.2d 618· 1st Cir.· 1988-04-07 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying Willco's motion for a new trial on its fraud claim, nor in its evidentiary rulings, but remanded for a reduction in damages awarded on the breach of contract counterclaim.
• United States v. LEO
  941 F.2d 181· 3d Cir.· 1991-07-25 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences of Leo and Badolato, finding sufficient evidence for Leo's false statement conviction and upholding the district court's evidentiary rulings.
• United States v. Biesiadecki
  933 F.2d 539· 7th Cir.· 1991-05-24 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for mail and wire fraud was supported by sufficient evidence, including affirmative misrepresentations and concealment of material facts, and that the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings or jury instructions.
• Kimbrough v. Bowman Transp., Inc.
  920 F.2d 1578· 11th Cir.· 1991-01-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendant waived the argument that the plaintiff's discharge was not actionable under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 by failing to raise it in the trial court, and that the district court's findings of fact were not clearly erroneous.
• United States v. Kroh
  915 F.2d 326· 8th Cir.· 1990-09-12 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the admission of a co-conspirator's guilty plea as substantive evidence of the defendant's guilt, despite a cautionary instruction, constituted reversible error due to its overwhelming prejudicial effect.
• United States v. Sullivan
  911 F.2d 2· 7th Cir.· 1990-08-28 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting certain testimony under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) and that sufficient evidence supported the jury's verdict on all counts.
• United States v. Newton
  912 F.2d 212· 8th Cir.· 1990-08-17 ·cited 10×
  The court held that evidence of prior bad acts was admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) and that the sentence imposed was not excessive.
• United States v. Williams
  902 F.2d 675· 8th Cir.· 1990-05-03 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting undisclosed photographs, did not err in refusing a special verdict form, and did not clearly err in finding the defendant acted as a leader/organizer for sentencing purposes.
• Anderson v. Pittsburgh-Des Moines Corp. & Ret. Plan for Salaried Emps. of Pittsburgh-Des Moines Corp.
  893 F.2d 638· 3d Cir.· 1990-01-12 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the term 'the Company' in the pension plan was ambiguous and extrinsic evidence should have been considered, requiring a new trial.
• Hines v. Brandon Steel Decks, Inc.
  886 F.2d 299· 11th Cir.· 1989-10-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court erred in per se excluding opinions and conclusions from an OSHA report based on then-current Eleventh Circuit precedent, which was subsequently reversed by the Supreme Court.
• Rachelle Williams v. Giant Eagle Mkts., Inc.
  883 F.2d 1184· 3d Cir.· 1989-08-28 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court erred in awarding attorneys' fees against the plaintiff under 28 U.S.C. § 1927, as the statute applies only to attorneys, not litigants, and that the finding of bad faith against the plaintiff's counsel was clearly erroneous. The court affir
• Leboeuf v. K-Mart Corp.
  888 F.2d 330· 5th Cir.· 1989-07-28 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the jury verdict, evidentiary rulings, and special verdict questions were not erroneous, affirming the district court's judgment.
• United States v. Archer
  843 F.2d 1019· 7th Cir.· 1988-04-05 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the defendant's motion to sever counts or in admitting evidence of prior escape plans.
• Corrine Nicholas v. Homelite Corp.
  780 F.2d 1150· 5th Cir.· 1986-01-15 ·cited 10×
  Louisiana law requires application of comparative fault to reduce a damage award in a products liability case when the consumer's negligent use of a defective product incentivizes careful future use and does not drastically reduce the manufacturer's incentive to produce safer pro
• United States v. Oswald Campbell
  774 F.2d 354· 9th Cir.· 1985-10-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting testimony about the April 1st theft, and any prosecutorial misconduct was harmless error.
• Gorby v. Schneider Tank Lines, Inc.
  741 F.2d 1015· 7th Cir.· 1984-08-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in prohibiting expert witnesses from identifying a disputed statement as a source of their opinions, nor in excluding lay opinion testimony, and correctly instructed the jury on duty of care and a theory of negligen
• United States v. Turk
  722 F.2d 1439· 9th Cir.· 1983-12-22 ·cited 10×
  The Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination does not justify a complete failure to file a tax return, and such a claim is not validly exercised when based on the possibility of an audit. The conviction for willful failure to file is affirmed.
• BIG John v. Indian Head Grain Co.
  718 F.2d 143· 5th Cir.· 1983-10-28 ·cited 10×
  A bailee's attempt to limit liability for negligence through an insurance agreement requires clear and unambiguous terms; otherwise, the evidence is inadmissible and the bailee remains liable.
• Grady Lee Copeland and Deborah Copeland v. Gulf OIL Corp.
  672 F.2d 867· 11th Cir.· 1982-04-05 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in refusing to strike a juror for cause, excluding proffered evidence, allowing the jury to use a dictionary, or denying a motion for a new trial.
• United States v. McCOY
  515 F.2d 962· 5th Cir.· 1975-07-11 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the conviction for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon was valid, affirming the trial court's decisions regarding wiretap authorization, seizure of evidence, and admission of other weapons.
• United States v. Harbolt
  491 F.2d 78· 5th Cir.· 1974-03-14 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the admission of evidence regarding the defendant's prior meeting with a co-defendant in prison, while potentially prejudicial, was not reversible error due to overwhelming evidence of guilt and the evidence's relevance to the defense's strategy.