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

• United States v. Koenig
  813 F.2d 1044· 9th Cir.· 1987-04-03 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the special condition of probation requiring restitution of 65% of income up to $5 million was not improper, unduly harsh, or a breach of the plea agreement.
• Silvester Trevino, Jr. v. Holly Sugar Corp.
  811 F.2d 896· 5th Cir.· 1987-03-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court's findings of no discrimination and denial of class certification were not clearly erroneous, and affirmed the denial of attorneys' fees and award of costs to the defendants.
• Friendship Park Prop. Corp. v. Shaw
  505 So. 2d 456· Fla. 1st DCA· 1987-02-10 ·cited 10×
  Friendship Park Property Corporation appealed a trial court's denial of equitable relief from forfeiture of a commercial lease due to its failure to timely exercise a renewal option. The court affirmed the denial, holding that although negligence and mistake were involved, the su
• Hardy Dotson, III v. Clark Equip. Co.
  805 F.2d 1225· 5th Cir.· 1986-12-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for a new trial and that the comparative negligence issue was not properly before the court due to untimeliness.
• In re Horenstein v. Sec'y OF Health & Human Servs.
  810 F.2d 73· 6th Cir.· 1986-11-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the District Court abused its discretion by failing to conduct an individualized analysis of the attorney fee request, instead applying a generalized approach.
• United States v. A.W.J. (juvenile)
  804 F.2d 492· 8th Cir.· 1986-11-04 ·cited 10×
  Orders transferring juveniles for adult prosecution are appealable under the collateral order doctrine, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in ordering the transfer.
• Ira Jackson, Jr. v. Dallas Police Dep't
  811 F.2d 260· 5th Cir.· 1986-10-17 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the appointment of counsel for a section 1983 claim, and that the appeal was not frivolous.
• Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Alaska Land Leasing, Inc.
  799 F.2d 507· 9th Cir.· 1986-09-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that sanctions under 28 U.S.C. § 1927 cannot be imposed against a non-attorney and that a party must receive adequate notice before sanctions are imposed.
• Mainland Indus., Inc. v. Standal's Patents Ltd.
  799 F.2d 746· Fed. Cir.· 1986-08-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the jury's findings of patent validity, enforceability, infringement, and false marking were supported by substantial evidence, and that the admission of a videotaped deposition was not an abuse of discretion.
• Shipley v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
  796 F.2d 120· 5th Cir.· 1986-08-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the appeal was timely filed and that while there was sufficient evidence of conscious pain and suffering and no contributory negligence, the damages awarded were excessive.
• United States v. 30.64 Acres OF Land
  795 F.2d 796· 9th Cir.· 1986-07-28 ·cited 10×
  The court reversed and remanded for consideration of appointing counsel and a guardian ad litem.
• United States v. City OF Chicago
  796 F.2d 205· 7th Cir.· 1986-07-07 ·cited 10×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard On Appeal
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the petitioners' motions to intervene, primarily due to untimeliness and the potential prejudice to ongoing litigation and operations.
• United States v. Benavides
  793 F.2d 612· 5th Cir.· 1986-06-20 ·cited 10×
  A defendant must show a fair and just reason to withdraw a guilty plea before sentencing, and the mere absence of prejudice to the government is insufficient if no credible reason is proffered.
• Dina v. Attorney Gen. OF the United States & Dir. of the United States Info. Agency
  793 F.2d 473· 2d Cir.· 1986-06-17 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the agency's denial of a hardship waiver was reviewable for abuse of discretion, and the agency provided sufficient reasoning for its denial.
• Feagans v. State
  487 So. 2d 408· Fla. 3d DCA· 1986-04-29 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motions for continuance, judgment of acquittal, or new trial.
• United States v. Beckham
  789 F.2d 401· 6th Cir.· 1986-04-29 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the First Amendment and common law grant the public a right of access to judicial records, including videotapes and transcripts introduced as evidence, and that the district court abused its discretion by denying access without sufficient justification.
• Smith v. United States Postal Serv.
  789 F.2d 1540· Fed. Cir.· 1986-04-24 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Merit Systems Protection Board's decision sustaining the removal of an employee was not arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law, and that any procedural errors were harmless.
• United States v. Outboard Marine Corp.
  789 F.2d 497· 7th Cir.· 1986-04-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the government's injunctive relief action without prejudice, conditioned on the government executing a covenant not to sue for injunctive relief, to allow for immediate cleanup of hazardous waste.
• United States v. Brooks
  786 F.2d 638· 5th Cir.· 1986-04-02 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in restricting cross-examination, allowing prosecutor comments on credibility, questioning the defendant about his silence, or responding to a jury question in the absence of counsel, as any errors were either harmless or proper.
• ST. Joseph's Hosp. OF Kan. City & Methodist Med. Ctr. v. Heckler
  786 F.2d 848· 8th Cir.· 1986-03-19 ·cited 10×
  The Provider Reimbursement Review Board's (PRRB) decision on whether there was just cause for a late filing is a final decision subject to judicial review.
• Carter v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  784 F.2d 1006· 9th Cir.· 1986-03-13 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a pro se litigant's failure to sign the notice of appeal deprives the court of jurisdiction, and that while tax protesters' arguments are frivolous, the penalty amount must be clarified.
• Friendship Heights Assocs. v. Vlastimil Koubek
  785 F.2d 1154· 4th Cir.· 1986-02-27 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in refusing to qualify two witnesses as experts, and this error was not harmless.
• United States v. Price
  783 F.2d 1132· 4th Cir.· 1986-02-21 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to disclose the confidential informant's identity because the informant's role was not material to the defense and the defendant's claims of entrapment and duress were not sufficiently supported.
• United States v. Fernandez
  780 F.2d 1573· 11th Cir.· 1986-01-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by not fully developing the facts and weighing the necessary factors before denying a motion to exclude testimony as a sanction for a discovery violation.
• Perry v. Winspur
  782 F.2d 893· 10th Cir.· 1986-01-28 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in allowing defense expert testimony, as appellants were neither surprised nor prejudiced.
• Corrine Nicholas v. Homelite Corp.
  780 F.2d 1150· 5th Cir.· 1986-01-15 ·cited 10×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  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
• Balboa Ins. Co. v. The United States
  775 F.2d 1158· Fed. Cir.· 1985-10-28 ·cited 10×
  The court held that both the Claims Court and the appellate court have jurisdiction over a Miller Act surety's claim for improperly disbursed funds, and that summary judgment was improper because material facts regarding the government's exercise of discretion were in dispute.
• United States v. Oswald Campbell
  774 F.2d 354· 9th Cir.· 1985-10-18 ·cited 10×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  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.
• United States v. Picone
  773 F.2d 224· 8th Cir.· 1985-09-19 ·cited 10×
  A district court's denial of a motion to withdraw a guilty plea will be reversed only if the court abused its discretion, and factual findings will not be set aside unless clearly erroneous.
• Yahkpua v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  770 F.2d 1317· 5th Cir.· 1985-09-16 ·cited 10×
  The Board of Immigration Appeals did not abuse its discretion in denying an alien's motion to reopen deportation proceedings based on a marriage that occurred after the deportation order was entered and after voluntary departure periods had expired.
• United States v. Hawkins
  765 F.2d 1482· 11th Cir.· 1985-07-22 ·cited 10×
  The majority's decision effectively repeals 18 U.S.C. § 3161(c)(2) by allowing trials less than thirty days after indictment.
• Cardwell v. Kurtz
  765 F.2d 776· 9th Cir.· 1985-07-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment on the fraud, deceit, and trickery claim because disputed facts regarding IRS agent misrepresentations required a trial, and that the government's position was not substantially justified, entitling plainti
• Mohammad Asad Sangabi v. U.S. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  763 F.2d 374· 9th Cir.· 1985-06-13 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) did not abuse its discretion in denying the petitioner's motion to reopen deportation proceedings, and that the petitioner's general allegations were insufficient for asylum or withholding claims.
• Saldana v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  762 F.2d 824· 9th Cir.· 1985-06-10 ·cited 10×
  The dissenting judge believes the court should affirm the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision, adhering to precedent that grants the BIA broad discretion in reopening deportation proceedings.
• Black United Fund OF NEW Jersey, Inc. v. Kean
  763 F.2d 156· 3d Cir.· 1985-05-24 ·cited 10×
  The court held that because a new statute repealed the challenged law and substantially enlarged eligibility criteria for charitable organizations, the appellate court should not affirm the district court's preliminary injunction, as the basis for the injunction no longer existed
• Haass v. India C. Haass
  468 So. 2d 1053· Fla. 4th DCA· 1985-05-08 ·cited 10×
  A trial court may award the marital home as lump sum alimony while considering the non-marital assets of the other spouse as a relevant circumstance under the equitable distribution statute, and an award of permanent periodic alimony of $2,000 monthly is not an abuse of discretio
• United States v. Abernathy
  757 F.2d 1012· 9th Cir.· 1985-04-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that venue was proper in Arizona for bond forfeiture proceedings because the breach of release conditions occurred there, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to set aside the forfeiture or remit the bond.
• Boudwin v. Graystone Ins. Co., Ltd.
  756 F.2d 399· 5th Cir.· 1985-04-01 ·cited 10×
  The court held that dismissal with prejudice for failure to prosecute was an abuse of discretion without a clear record of egregious delay and findings on lesser sanctions.
• Ayrton O. Reid v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  756 F.2d 7· 3d Cir.· 1985-02-28 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to establish a prima facie case for relief under either § 212(c) or § 241(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, and thus the BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying his motion to reopen deportation proceedings.
• Kabbe v. Rotan Mosle, Inc.
  752 F.2d 1083· 5th Cir.· 1985-02-14 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the action with prejudice for repeated failure to comply with discovery orders.
• Havanatur, S.A. v. 747 Travel Agency, Inc.
  463 So. 2d 404· Fla. 3d DCA· 1985-01-29 ·cited 10×
  The payee of a certified check should be permitted to intervene in an action brought by the purchaser against the bank to recover the amount of the check, even if the motion is filed after the litigation has commenced but before final judgment.
• Jones v. Zimmerman
  752 F.2d 76· 3d Cir.· 1985-01-16 ·cited 10×
  A district court abuses its discretion by requiring a prisoner to pay a partial filing fee when the prisoner has demonstrated insufficient funds, even considering small amenities.
• United States v. Sanders
  749 F.2d 195· 5th Cir.· 1984-12-11 ·cited 10×
  Computer printouts of Medicaid claims and payments, generated from data entered near the time of the transactions and kept for operational purposes, are admissible as business records under Fed.R.Evid. 803(6).
• Crutcher v. The AETNA Life Ins. Co.
  746 F.2d 1076· 5th Cir.· 1984-11-19 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Crutcher's Rule 60(b) motion to set aside the judgment and in dismissing his counterclaims, as he failed to demonstrate a meritorious defense or lack of opportunity to present his case.
• State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. & John E. Wilkerson v. Howard
  458 So. 2d 874· Fla. 2d DCA· 1984-11-14 ·cited 10×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For New Trial Motions
  The court held that the trial court did not err in granting a directed verdict on the tort exemption and did not abuse its discretion in granting a new trial on damages.
• Delois Earlie v. Jacobs
  745 F.2d 342· 5th Cir.· 1984-11-01 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not err in striking the jury demand because the claims were primarily equitable and the punitive damages claim was factually unsupported. It also held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to amend th
• Castle v. Sangamo Weston, Inc.
  744 F.2d 1464· 11th Cir.· 1984-10-26 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a pending private ADEA action is not terminated by the EEOC's subsequent filing, and that the work product privilege was not waived by transferring materials to the EEOC.
• United States v. Lewis
  743 F.2d 1127· 5th Cir.· 1984-10-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a defendant's request to review his presentence investigation report after sentencing in connection with a motion to reduce sentence.
• Langer v. Langer
  463 So. 2d 265· Fla. 3d DCA· 1984-10-02 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court erred in excluding evidence of marital misconduct and in awarding the wife's interests in jointly held property to the husband as lump sum alimony without justification. Additionally, several key findings were not supported by competent substan
• United States v. Green
  742 F.2d 609· 11th Cir.· 1984-09-24 ·cited 10×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard On Appeal
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's motion for a continuance and dismissing his challenge to the jury venire because the defendant failed to comply with the statutory prerequisites for making such a challenge.