Abuse Of Discretion (Standard Of Review)

12,259 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 1,650 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• A-Abart Elec. Supply v. Emerson Elec. Co. & Littman Bros. Energy Supplies
  956 F.2d 1399· 7th Cir.· 1992-02-27 ·cited 10×
  The court held that A-Abart's antitrust claim was a frivolous vertical non-price restraint not per se illegal, its contract claim failed due to the statute of frauds and lack of promissory estoppel, and its tortious interference claims were barred by competitor's privilege, thus
• Nunez-Pena v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  956 F.2d 223· 10th Cir.· 1992-02-06 ·cited 10×
  The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) did not abuse its discretion in denying discretionary relief from deportation under INA § 212(c) by applying the 'outstanding equities' standard, which can be established through adjudication.
• Mitcheson v. Harris
  955 F.2d 235· 4th Cir.· 1992-01-29 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in issuing a declaratory judgment on the merits of Lloyd's policy coverage, but correctly issued a declaratory judgment on the duty to defend.
• Teamsters v. Superline Transp. Co., Inc.
  953 F.2d 17· 1st Cir.· 1992-01-07 ·cited 10×
  A party seeking to vacate a judgment under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(6) must demonstrate a meritorious claim or defense, and failure to do so is grounds for denial.
• United States v. Haren
  952 F.2d 190· 8th Cir.· 1991-12-20 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences of the appellants, finding sufficient evidence for convictions, no reversible error in jury instructions or evidentiary rulings, and no abuse of discretion in sentencing enhancements.
• Confer v. Custom Eng'g Co.
  952 F.2d 41· 3d Cir.· 1991-12-19 ·cited 10×
  An oral statement or informal notice does not modify an ERISA plan; only a written instrument can amend the plan. Issues not properly preserved in the lower court are waived on appeal.
• United States v. Blas
  947 F.2d 1320· 7th Cir.· 1991-11-14 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, the trial court did not err in denying production of documents used to refresh a witness's recollection, the finding regarding the quantity of drugs involved in a larger conspiracy was not clearly erroneou
• United States v. Donahue
  948 F.2d 438· 8th Cir.· 1991-10-24 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the indictment was sufficient, eyewitness identification was not impermissibly suggestive, hearsay testimony was harmless error, statements made to police were not custodial, and severance was not required.
• Raffaella Y. Nanetti v. Univ. OF Ill. AT Chicago
  944 F.2d 1416· 7th Cir.· 1991-10-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that reducing lead counsel's hourly rate without specific justification was an abuse of discretion, and that applying two separate reductions to the fees-on-fees award for the same reason constituted an improper double reduction.
• United States v. Spine
  945 F.2d 143· 6th Cir.· 1991-09-23 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a district court's denial of a continuance for extensive juror tax history searches was not an abuse of discretion when balanced with the need for judicial efficiency and when supplemented by thorough voir dire. The court also held that computer-generated IRS
• United States v. Octavio Font-Ramirez
  944 F.2d 42· 1st Cir.· 1991-09-11 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying severance, admitting the tape recording and transcript, or applying sentencing enhancements, affirming the conviction and sentence.
• United States v. Mark
  943 F.2d 444· 4th Cir.· 1991-08-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting extrinsic act evidence under Fed.R.Evid. 404(b) and that the determination of relevant conduct for sentencing purposes was not clearly erroneous.
• COX v. Sandia Corp.
  941 F.2d 1124· 10th Cir.· 1991-08-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the claim for failure to timely serve process, as the plaintiff's counsel's reliance on a process server and the server's injury did not constitute good cause or excusable neglect.
• In re Case v. Case
  937 F.2d 1014· 5th Cir.· 1991-08-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the bankruptcy court properly reopened the estate and adjudicated the dispute as a core proceeding, but erred in declaring sanctions non-dischargeable without proper procedure. Sanctions against an attorney for state court actions were also improper under § 19
• United States v. LEO
  941 F.2d 181· 3d Cir.· 1991-07-25 ·cited 10×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  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.
• Isadore Cassuto and Thalia Cassuto v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  936 F.2d 736· 2d Cir.· 1991-06-26 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Tax Court did not abuse its discretion in denying attorneys' fees for the 1981 petition and in refusing to recognize 'special factors' for a higher hourly rate, but erred in calculating cost of living adjustments from 1981 instead of 1986.
• United States v. Palinkas
  938 F.2d 456· 4th Cir.· 1991-06-26 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court properly departed upward in sentencing Kochekian and did not err in denying Palinkas a reduction for his role in the offense.
• Clay Fryman and Bobby Kinder v. Fed. Crop Ins. Corp.
  936 F.2d 244· 6th Cir.· 1991-06-13 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the invited error doctrine did not preclude the trial court from granting a new trial and summary judgment when there was a clear and prejudicial error in jury instructions regarding the necessity of consideration for an oral insurance contract.
• United States v. Marcel Dupre Duke
  935 F.2d 161· 8th Cir.· 1991-06-10 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not err in applying a two-point increase for obstruction of justice, denying a two-point reduction for acceptance of responsibility, and applying a two-point increase for possession of a firearm.
• United States v. Biesiadecki
  933 F.2d 539· 7th Cir.· 1991-05-24 ·cited 10×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  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.
• Browning v. Stephen J. Kramer, M.D.
  931 F.2d 340· 5th Cir.· 1991-05-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that an award of attorneys' fees under 28 U.S.C. § 1927 against a party (Dr. Kramer) was improper, and remanded for specific findings regarding an award against an attorney (Ms. Kramer) for vexatious multiplication of proceedings.
• United States v. Vernon Barrett (90-5715)
  933 F.2d 355· 6th Cir.· 1991-05-08 ·cited 10×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Severance
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to prove conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute, and that convictions for conspiracy and attempt arising from the same transaction do not violate double jeopardy.
• United States v. Clark
  931 F.2d 292· 5th Cir.· 1991-04-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion to withdraw the guilty plea, but erred in ordering restitution beyond the scope of the offenses of conviction.
• Werbungs UND Commerz Union Austalt v. Collectors' Guild, Ltd.
  930 F.2d 1021· 2d Cir.· 1991-04-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the instructional error regarding discovery abuse constituted plain error and could not be cured by remittitur, but disagreed on whether to reach the preclusionary rulings.
• Bertolino v. Comm'r Internal Revenue Serv.
  930 F.2d 759· 9th Cir.· 1991-04-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the government's position, for the purpose of awarding attorney fees under IRC § 7430, is determined from the point the District Counsel becomes involved in the administrative action or inaction.
• Unger v. Nat'l Residents Matching Program
  928 F.2d 1392· 3d Cir.· 1991-04-02 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a plaintiff cannot establish a due process claim based on a contract without alleging a breach of that contract.
• United States v. Murdock
  928 F.2d 293· 8th Cir.· 1991-03-20 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding that identification procedures were not impermissibly suggestive, the refusal to sever counts was not an abuse of discretion, the search of belongings was consensual, and the initial stop was supported by probable cause.
• Quinton v. Farmland Indus., Inc.
  928 F.2d 335· 10th Cir.· 1991-03-12 ·cited 10×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Expert Testimony
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting expert testimony and that a directed verdict for third-party defendants was proper due to insufficient evidence.
• Smithkline Diagnostics, Inc. v. Helena Labs. Corp.
  926 F.2d 1161· Fed. Cir.· 1991-02-26 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the district court's award of damages based on a 25% reasonable royalty, finding that the patent holder failed to prove lost profits and that the district court was not limited to the royalty rates proposed by the parties.
• Notrica v. Bd. OF Supervisors OF the Cnty. OF SAN Diego
  925 F.2d 1211· 9th Cir.· 1991-02-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a district court does not abuse its discretion by refusing to consider a state court time-bar as a determinative factor when a plaintiff initiates litigation in both state and federal courts and the federal claims are subsequently dismissed.
• Seidman v. Am. Airlines, Inc.
  923 F.2d 1134· 5th Cir.· 1991-02-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, but it did err in not reducing the damage award sufficiently, requiring a further remittitur.
• Harry Plyler (Formerly Gary Wayne Nelson v. Parker Evatt
  924 F.2d 1321· 4th Cir.· 1991-01-23 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the state any relief from the consent decree's cell-space requirements, as prior precedent established the state's entitlement to equitable relief due to unanticipated population increases.
• Kimbrough v. Bowman Transp., Inc.
  920 F.2d 1578· 11th Cir.· 1991-01-15 ·cited 10×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  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.
• Clarksville-Montgomery Cnty. Sch. Sys. v. United States Gypsum Co.
  925 F.2d 993· 6th Cir.· 1991-01-10 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the jury's verdict, holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in its evidentiary rulings or jury instructions.
• Villa v. City OF Chicago
  924 F.2d 629· 7th Cir.· 1991-01-03 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not err in granting summary judgment on the Title VII and implied contract claims, nor in denying leave to amend the complaint.
• A.G. Edwards & Sons, Inc. v. Pub. Bldg. Comm'n OF ST. Clair Cnty.
  921 F.2d 118· 7th Cir.· 1990-12-27 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in abstaining from exercising jurisdiction over a declaratory judgment action due to the existence of a parallel state court action.
• United States v. Singleton
  917 F.2d 411· 9th Cir.· 1990-10-23 ·cited 10×
  A district court's departure from the Sentencing Guidelines based on significant physical injury and disruption of a government function was improper when the facts did not support these findings.
• Bank ONE OF Cleveland, N.A. v. Lowell L. Abbe
  916 F.2d 1067· 6th Cir.· 1990-10-17 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court erred in entering default judgment against defendants who invoked the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, but did not abuse its discretion regarding other defendants who failed to comply with discovery orders.
• Leone v. Leone
  577 So. 2d 587· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-10-16 ·cited 10×
  Pamela Leone appealed a final judgment dissolving her marriage to Samuel Leone, challenging awards for child support, alimony, and property division. The Florida appellate court affirmed the trial court's determinations, finding no abuse of discretion in the child support amount,
• Refac Int'l, Ltd. v. Hitachi, Ltd.
  921 F.2d 1247· Fed. Cir.· 1990-10-02 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the district court's order of noninfringement and dismissal due to discovery violations, awarded attorney fees and double costs for a frivolous appeal, and remanded for determination of Rule 11 sanctions.
• United States v. Joseph
  914 F.2d 780· 6th Cir.· 1990-09-19 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the restitution order was defective because it was imposed in connection with the wrong offense, the amount was not adequately supported by factual findings, and it improperly required security for payments beyond the probation period.
• United States v. Kroh
  915 F.2d 326· 8th Cir.· 1990-09-12 ·cited 10×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  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.
• Adriana Int'l Corp. v. Konstantin Thoeren
  913 F.2d 1406· 9th Cir.· 1990-09-10 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing discovery sanctions, including default judgment, due to Adriana's willful and repeated discovery abuses, and that the award of emotional distress damages for fraud was improper.
• 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×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  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.
• TMF Tool Co., Inc. v. Hans Muller
  913 F.2d 1185· 7th Cir.· 1990-08-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that sanctions against TMF for improper service of process were an abuse of discretion because the service was not contrary to existing circuit law, and sanctions against Muller for his fee petitions were also an abuse of discretion as his amended petition addresse
• Gonzalez v. State
  565 So. 2d 410· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-08-14 ·cited 10×
  A trial court may deny a motion to expunge a criminal record in its sole discretion, even if statutory criteria are met, and such denial will be affirmed if it was a reasonable exercise of that discretion.
• Sweet v. Consol. Aluminum Corp. & Mfrs. Hanover Tr. Co.
  913 F.2d 268· 6th Cir.· 1990-08-14 ·cited 10×
  The majority opinion incorrectly determined that the district court abused its discretion in awarding prejudgment interest from the date the lawsuit was filed, rather than an earlier date.
• Nestor del Carmen v. Emerson Elec. Co.
  908 F.2d 158· 7th Cir.· 1990-07-19 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in denying the motion for relief from judgment because the record lacked sufficient evidence of dilatory conduct or contumacious behavior to warrant dismissal.
• United States v. Hickok
  907 F.2d 983· 10th Cir.· 1990-07-03 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea.