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. McCOY
  515 F.2d 962· 5th Cir.· 1975-07-11 ·cited 10×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  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.
• Local Union NO. 251 affiliated with Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters v. Town Line Sand & Gravel, Inc.
  511 F.2d 1198· 1st Cir.· 1975-03-14 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in entering a default judgment as a sanction for the appellant's willful and deliberate violation of a discovery order.
• Donn F. Flipse v. Flipse
  305 So. 2d 16· Fla. 3d DCA· 1974-12-17 ·cited 10×
  In this dissolution of marriage case, the Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed an award of $17,500 in attorney's fees to the ex-wife's counsel, but modified the payment schedule to three equal annual installments based on the husband's limited liquid assets and modest weekly
• United States v. Zane
  507 F.2d 346· 2d Cir.· 1974-11-04 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the motion for a new trial because the newly discovered evidence was cumulative and not likely to produce a different result.
• First Girl, Inc. v. Reg'l Manpower Adm'r OF the United States Dep't OF Labor
  499 F.2d 122· 7th Cir.· 1974-07-02 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court's finding of abuse of discretion was proper because the administrative record contained no evidence supporting the denial of alien employment certification.
• The Robinswood Cmty. Club v. Volpe
  506 F.2d 1366· 9th Cir.· 1974-03-26 ·cited 10×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Preliminary Injunctions
  The court held that under the CEQ guidelines, an environmental impact statement was not required for the highway project because it was not practicable to halt construction, despite federal actions occurring after NEPA's effective date.
• United States v. Harbolt
  491 F.2d 78· 5th Cir.· 1974-03-14 ·cited 10×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  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.
• United States v. Shapiro
  491 F.2d 335· 6th Cir.· 1974-02-06 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in revoking the appellant's probation because sufficient evidence showed he violated the terms of his probation by failing to ensure compliance with FDA regulations.
• Monge v. State
  286 So. 2d 34· Fla. 3d DCA· 1973-12-04 ·cited 10×
  A voluntary guilty plea waives non-jurisdictional defects, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to allow withdrawal of the plea.
• United States v. Frank Cacciatore & 1463 Rest. Corp.
  487 F.2d 240· 2d Cir.· 1973-11-14 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district judge abused his discretion by dismissing the indictment for failure to prosecute and denial of a speedy trial, given the specific facts of witness unavailability and the court's scheduling.
• Nat'l Ass'n FOR the Advancement of Colored People v. Lansing Bd. OF Educ.
  485 F.2d 569· 6th Cir.· 1973-08-29 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district judge did not abuse his discretion in granting the preliminary injunction to reinstate a desegregation plan.
• Vina v. HUB Elec. Co.
  480 F.2d 1139· 7th Cir.· 1973-06-29 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district judge abused his discretion by dismissing the case for want of prosecution, as the plaintiff was not responsible for the clerk's failure to issue summons and had acted diligently.
• United States v. Stumpf
  476 F.2d 945· 4th Cir.· 1973-04-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that while the initial denial of the sentence reduction motion was not an abuse of discretion based on the record before the district court, the subsequent psychiatric evidence warranted further consideration.
• WM. A. Smith Contracting Co., Inc. v. The Travelers Indem. Co.
  467 F.2d 662· 10th Cir.· 1972-10-10 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a written settlement agreement, which contained mutual releases and was intended to resolve all claims under the contracts, could not be modified by a contemporaneous oral agreement regarding a specific fire damage claim, absent fraud, accident, or mistake.
• Albert v. Hon. John H. Chafee
  465 F.2d 367· 9th Cir.· 1972-08-17 ·cited 10×·via Arbitrary, Capricious, Or Abuse Of Discretion Standard
  The court held that jurisdiction exists under the Administrative Procedure Act to review the dismissal of a civilian employee of the Department of the Navy.
• Reece v. United States
  455 F.2d 240· 9th Cir.· 1972-02-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the action because the Air Force's decision regarding promotion was committed to agency discretion and the appellant failed to show a patent abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Baggett
  455 F.2d 476· 5th Cir.· 1972-02-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a request for the name of the person from whom the defendant received the stolen automobile, nor in refusing to grant a severance from co-defendants.
• Etling v. Sander
  447 F.2d 593· 7th Cir.· 1971-07-28 ·cited 10×·via Abuse Of Discretion (Appellate Review)
• Pittman v. Smith
  252 So. 2d 279· Fla. 4th DCA· 1971-07-22 ·cited 10×
  The appellate court affirmed the trial judge's order granting a new trial, finding no abuse of discretion.
• Roth v. Laird
  446 F.2d 855· 2d Cir.· 1971-06-24 ·cited 10×
  The court held that discretionary decisions by military officials within their jurisdiction are not subject to judicial review unless they violate regulations or are arbitrary and irrational.
• Smith v. Concordia Parish Sch. Bd.
  445 F.2d 285· 5th Cir.· 1971-06-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the District Court's findings regarding racial discrimination in teacher dismissals and its establishment of faculty racial ratios were not clearly erroneous and did not constitute an abuse of discretion.
• Hollis Smith and Edmond J. Duhart v. State
  243 So. 2d 602· Fla. 3d DCA· 1971-02-09 ·cited 10×
  Smith and Duhart appealed their robbery convictions, challenging the sufficiency of evidence, closing argument remarks, and evidentiary rulings. The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed their convictions, finding the evidence sufficient and no reversible error in the trial c
• Strickland v. ST. Petersburg Auto Auction, Inc.
  243 So. 2d 603· Fla. 4th DCA· 1971-02-08 ·cited 10×
  Joel C. Strickland, Jr. appeals a judgment against him, challenging the trial court's decision to permit an amendment to the plaintiff's complaint that changed the legal theory from fraudulent misrepresentation against all defendants to conversion against Strickland alone. The ap
• United States v. Lethenia Alfonzia Williams
  435 F.2d 1001· 5th Cir.· 1970-12-17 ·cited 10×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Continuance
  The court held that bringing hashish into the United States after taking it out of the country, without declaration, constitutes illegal importation, and that the prosecutor's comments on appellant's prior admissions were permissible.
• Sherburne v. United States
  433 F.2d 1350· 8th Cir.· 1970-11-18 ·cited 10×
  The court should have held an evidentiary hearing to determine if the defendant fully understood the charges and maximum sentence before denying his motion to withdraw his guilty plea.
• United States v. Hyman Sternman
  433 F.2d 913· 6th Cir.· 1970-11-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a motion to reduce sentence under Rule 35 cannot be used to reargue issues decided on direct appeal or to present issues that should have been raised then.
• Spering v. Tex. Butadiene & Chem. Corp.
  434 F.2d 677· 3d Cir.· 1970-10-21 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the District Court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the plaintiff's case with prejudice under a local rule for failure to prosecute, but allowed the claim for services rendered after a specific date.
• United States v. D'Amato
  429 F.2d 1284· 3d Cir.· 1970-07-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district judge did not abuse his discretion in revoking probation based on the evidence presented.
• United States v. Cousins
  429 F.2d 1271· 9th Cir.· 1970-06-17 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse discretion in denying a motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence, as the evidence would not have likely led to an acquittal.
• Asuncion v. Dist. Dir. of the United States Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  427 F.2d 523· 9th Cir.· 1970-06-02 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Attorney General's denial of a preference visa was supported by substantial evidence and did not constitute an abuse of discretion.
• Romeo Estrella-Ortega v. United States
  423 F.2d 509· 9th Cir.· 1970-02-26 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to call a government informer as the court's witness and that the entrapment issue was properly submitted to the jury.
• Costas Theodoropoulos and Eleni Theodoropoulos v. Thompson-Starrett Co., Inc.
  418 F.2d 350· 2d Cir.· 1969-11-17 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the appellants' suit with prejudice for failure to prosecute, as the plaintiffs' claims of lack of notice constituted inexcusable neglect.
• Botsford v. Ideal Trucking Co.
  417 F.2d 681· 2d Cir.· 1969-10-28 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the jury's verdict was excessive given the plaintiff's own testimony regarding his continued work and medical history.
• Leggett v. Seaboard Coast Line R.R. Co.
  221 So. 2d 16· Fla. 1st DCA· 1969-04-08 ·cited 10×
  Plaintiff Leggett appealed after losing a motion for a new trial in his negligence suit against Seaboard Coast Line Railroad for injuries sustained when a railroad switch engine struck his vehicle at a crossing. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's grant of a new trial,
• The United States v. Chas. Kurz Co.
  396 F.2d 1013· C.C.P.A.· 1968-06-27 ·cited 10×
  A trial court's dismissal of a case for lack of prosecution will not be disturbed on appeal unless there is a gross abuse of discretion; the trial judge here properly exercised his authority under Rule 5(b) and did not act arbitrarily or capriciously.
• Conchita S. Lewin v. Metro. Life Ins. Co.
  394 F.2d 608· 3d Cir.· 1968-04-16 ·cited 10×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For New Trial Motions
  The court held that the district court erred in granting judgment n.o.v. and a new trial, finding sufficient evidence for the jury to determine the infection was the sole cause of the insured's disability.
• Carlton v. United States
  391 F.2d 684· 8th Cir.· 1968-03-28 ·cited 10×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard On Appeal
  The court held that the trial court properly admitted the officer's testimony and the seized evidence, and that grounds for suppression not raised at trial cannot be asserted on appeal.
• SAM v. United States
  385 F.2d 213· 10th Cir.· 1967-11-15 ·cited 10×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Continuance
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to grant a continuance for the defendant to secure new counsel, nor was the statute's sentencing provision an unconstitutional delegation of power. The sentence imposed was not cruel and unusual punishment.
• Ulysses Sutton v. State
  202 So. 2d 589· Fla. 1st DCA· 1967-09-26 ·cited 10×
  Ulysses Sutton was convicted of unlawful sale of marijuana cigarettes after pleading guilty. He appealed, challenging the trial court's denial of his motion to withdraw his guilty plea, the verification of the information, and his waiver of jury trial. The appellate court affirme
• Armstrong v. Piatt
  201 So. 2d 830· Fla. 4th DCA· 1967-08-18 ·cited 10×
  In this interlocutory appeal, the Fourth District Court of Appeal reviewed discovery orders requiring defendants to produce corporate books and records in a case where plaintiffs claim they are entitled to a motel franchise and half ownership of the franchise business. The court
• Brown v. Burr-Brown Research Corp.
  378 F.2d 822· 5th Cir.· 1967-06-09 ·cited 10×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For New Trial Motions
  The court held that the evidence admitted was sufficient to support the jury's award of damages for lost profits, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in submitting the issues to the jury.
• Pitt v. United States
  378 F.2d 608· 8th Cir.· 1967-05-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the venue was proper in the Eastern District of Missouri and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea.
• Diapulse Corp. OF Am. v. The Curtis Publ'g Co.
  374 F.2d 442· 2d Cir.· 1967-03-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the plaintiff's willful and flagrant disregard of discovery orders, including the refusal to produce documents for copying and inspection, justified the dismissal of its complaint.
• Springfield Crusher, Inc. v. Transcon. Ins. Co.
  372 F.2d 125· 3d Cir.· 1967-02-01 ·cited 10×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For New Trial Motions
  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion in denying the motion for a new trial because the jury's damage award was clearly erroneous and not supported by the evidence.
• Levison v. Levison
  193 So. 2d 630· Fla. 3d DCA· 1967-01-17 ·cited 10×
  In this 1967 Florida divorce appeal, the wife challenges the trial court's denial of her claims for repayment of alleged loans to her husband's business, a share of mortgage refinancing proceeds, and the adequacy of alimony. The appellate court affirmed the decree, finding no abu
• Valentin Zdravko Novinc v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  371 F.2d 272· 7th Cir.· 1967-01-03 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the denial of the motion to reopen deportation hearings was not an abuse of discretion.
• Montgomery v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  367 F.2d 917· 9th Cir.· 1966-10-14 ·cited 10×
  The Tax Court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the taxpayer's petition for redetermination for lack of prosecution, nor in denying his motions for continuance.
• Hammersla v. Price
  190 So. 2d 765· Fla.· 1966-10-05 ·cited 10×
  In this workers' compensation case, the Florida Supreme Court reversed the Industrial Commission's vacation of a 50% permanent partial disability award, holding that the Commission improperly substituted its judgment for the deputy commissioner's factual findings and abused its d
• Gardner v. Moon
  360 F.2d 556· 8th Cir.· 1966-05-12 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Secretary's determination that the claimant failed to show good cause for an extension of time to request a hearing was not an abuse of discretion.
• Ostermann v. State
  183 So. 2d 873· Fla. 2d DCA· 1966-03-16 ·cited 10×
  Ostermann appeals his conviction for grand larceny, contending the trial judge abused discretion by refusing to allow him to withdraw his guilty plea. The appellate court affirms, holding that a defendant seeking to withdraw a guilty plea must show good cause—such as mental weakn