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

• Pauley v. Pauley
  652 So. 2d 488· Fla. 4th DCA· 1995-03-29 ·cited 8×
  In this Florida dissolution action, the appellate court reviewed the trial court's alimony award and support obligations regarding health insurance and life insurance premiums. The court affirmed the permanent periodic alimony award but partially reversed the health insurance pro
• Yakob Dennis v. State
  649 So. 2d 263· Fla. 5th DCA· 1994-12-30 ·cited 8×
  Yakob Dennis appealed his convictions for attempted sexual battery on a child under 12 and capital sexual battery, challenging the trial court's admission of a redacted videotaped deposition showing the child's prior consistent statements. The appellate court affirmed, holding th
• Shaw v. State
  645 So. 2d 68· Fla. 4th DCA· 1994-11-09 ·cited 8×
  The appellate court affirmed the conviction but reversed the adult sentence, remanding for the trial court to make specific written findings regarding the juvenile's "sophistication and maturity" before potentially reimposing adult sanctions.
• Inter-Atlantic Ins. Servs., Inc. v. Hernandez
  632 So. 2d 1069· Fla. 3d DCA· 1994-02-15 ·cited 8×
  Inter-Atlantic Insurance Services appeals a trial court's denial of its motion to vacate a default judgment entered against it in an insurance coverage dispute. The court affirmed, holding that Inter-Atlantic failed to demonstrate excusable neglect required to set aside the defau
• Nat'l Wrecking Co. v. Int'l Bhd. OF Teamsters
  990 F.2d 957· 7th Cir.· 1993-04-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a party waives arguments not presented to the arbitrator and that sanctions under Rule 11 were not warranted for claims that, while unsuccessful, were not entirely groundless.
• Forest Henry Shipes v. Trinity Indus.
  987 F.2d 311· 5th Cir.· 1993-04-05 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the district court's class certification and back pay award, but remanded the attorneys' fees enhancement for further consideration of the 'results obtained' factor and reversed the contingency enhancement.
• Castrol Inc. v. Pennzoil Co. & Pennzoil Prods. Co.
  987 F.2d 939· 3d Cir.· 1993-02-04 ·cited 8×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Injunctions
• Moore v. Mabus
  976 F.2d 268· 5th Cir.· 1992-11-02 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the dismissal of the civil rights complaint under § 1915(d) was improper due to the complexity of the issues and the need for further factual and legal development, but affirmed the dismissal of the privacy and loss of privileges claims.
• United States v. Rusel J. Jagim
  978 F.2d 1032· 8th Cir.· 1992-10-29 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences of all defendants, finding no abuse of discretion in the trial court's rulings on plea withdrawals, continuances, severances, or sentencing enhancements.
• Trupin v. Wallquist
  605 So. 2d 1295· Fla. 4th DCA· 1992-10-07 ·cited 8×
  Trupin appeals the trial court's denial of his motion to vacate a default final judgment entered in an investment securities dispute. The court affirmed the denial, finding no abuse of discretion in the trial judge's decision to credit the opposing party's version of events regar
• United States v. Hartsfield
  976 F.2d 1349· 10th Cir.· 1992-10-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of gang membership and prior drug dealings, denying motions for mistrial, and utilizing mass jury selection, and that sufficient evidence supported the conspiracy conviction.
• Gates v. Deukmejian
  977 F.2d 1300· 9th Cir.· 1992-10-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by failing to articulate a clear reason for the ten percent fee reduction and by not independently reviewing the fee application. The court also held that enhancement for contingency is not permitted under 42 U.S.C. § 1
• Annabelle Lipsett v. Gumersindo Blanco
  975 F.2d 934· 1st Cir.· 1992-09-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that while the lodestar calculation was largely correct, the enhancement for risk of nonpayment and exceptional performance was improper, and certain vague time entries should be discounted, requiring a reduction in the total fee award.
• United States v. Bennett
  975 F.2d 305· 6th Cir.· 1992-09-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a mistrial, refusing an intoxication instruction, applying an obstruction of justice enhancement, or departing upward from the Sentencing Guidelines based on the defendant's extensive recidivism.
• McKNIGHT v. Gen. Motors Corp.
  973 F.2d 1366· 7th Cir.· 1992-09-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying reinstatement or front pay, nor in refusing to reopen the record, and that the request for prejudgment interest was untimely.
• Mercado v. Salim Ahmed & Checker Taxi Co.
  974 F.2d 863· 7th Cir.· 1992-09-04 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the jury's verdict was not irreconcilably inconsistent and that the exclusion of certain expert testimony and rebuttal witnesses was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Singer
  970 F.2d 1414· 5th Cir.· 1992-08-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the search warrant was valid, evidence was admissible, discovery violations did not prejudice the defendant, the evidence was sufficient for conviction, and the sentence was properly calculated under the Sentencing Guidelines.
• United States v. Castro
  972 F.2d 1107· 9th Cir.· 1992-08-17 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to substitute counsel and that there was sufficient evidence for the jury to find the defendant was a member of the conspiracy and possessed cocaine. However, the court reversed in part, fin
• Young v. Louis W. Sullivan, M.D.
  972 F.2d 830· 7th Cir.· 1992-08-14 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the plaintiff's application for attorney fees under the EAJA was timely filed and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding the government's position substantially justified.
• United States v. Gessa
  971 F.2d 1257· 6th Cir.· 1992-08-07 ·cited 8×
  Under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.4 and Application Note One, a sentencing court is not automatically required to include the weight of an uncompleted conspiracy transaction in the base offense level but must make specific findings regarding the defendant's intent and reasonable capability to
• Mehdi Abedini v. U.S. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  971 F.2d 188· 9th Cir.· 1992-07-24 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the applicant failed to establish a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion, and that the Board's denial of voluntary departure was not an abuse of discretion.
• Marco v. Accent Publ'g Co., Inc.
  969 F.2d 1547· 3d Cir.· 1992-07-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a freelance photographer, paid by the job, using his own equipment and studio, and lacking employee benefits, was an independent contractor, not an employee, for "work for hire" purposes under the Copyright Act.
• Abbott Labs. v. Mead Johnson & Co.
  971 F.2d 6· 7th Cir.· 1992-07-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction, finding that Abbott had established a likelihood of success on its false advertising claim and that irreparable harm was not adequately rebutted.
• United States v. Greig
  967 F.2d 1018· 5th Cir.· 1992-07-23 ·cited 8×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Jury Instructions
  The court held that the trial court erred by failing to conduct a Garcia hearing when it was aware of an actual conflict of interest involving Greig's counsel, which adversely affected counsel's performance, thus violating Greig's Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of
• Navarro-Ayala v. Nunez
  968 F.2d 1421· 1st Cir.· 1992-07-13 ·cited 8×
  The court held that while a Rule 11 violation occurred, the $20,000 sanction was disproportionate and reduced it to $6,500.
• Nikola Akrap v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  966 F.2d 267· 7th Cir.· 1992-06-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to review the denial of a stay of deportation or the denial of a motion to reopen deportation proceedings. The court affirmed the Board of Immigration Appeals' denial of a waiver of deportability, finding no abuse of discretion.
• Ashby v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  961 F.2d 555· 5th Cir.· 1992-05-29 ·cited 8×
  The Board of Immigration Appeals did not abuse its discretion in denying Michael Ashby a waiver of deportation under section 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
• United States v. Tilley
  964 F.2d 66· 1st Cir.· 1992-05-15 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion to withdraw the guilty plea, nor did it abuse its discretion in departing upward from the sentencing guidelines.
• COX v. Mid-America Dairymen, Inc.
  965 F.2d 569· 8th Cir.· 1992-05-11 ·cited 8×
• United States v. Wilson
  962 F.2d 621· 7th Cir.· 1992-05-01 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the conviction but vacated the sentence and remanded for resentencing due to an ex post facto violation in applying an amended statute.
• United States v. Justina Martinez-Gonzalez
  962 F.2d 874· 9th Cir.· 1992-04-20 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not err in departing upward from the Sentencing Guidelines based on the sophistication of the smuggling organization and the large number of aliens involved, nor in denying a downward adjustment for acceptance of responsibility.
• United States v. Williams
  957 F.2d 1238· 5th Cir.· 1992-04-01 ·cited 8×
  The court held that while the district court erred in admitting drug courier profile testimony and evidence of a marijuana cigarette, these errors were harmless due to overwhelming evidence of guilt.
• In the Interest of S.M.B. and S.B.
  597 So. 2d 848· Fla. 1st DCA· 1992-03-30 ·cited 8×
  In a juvenile dependency case, the First District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's adjudication of two children as dependent, holding that the trial court abused its discretion by repeatedly denying the mother's requests to have the children examined and evaluated by he
• Disabled Am. Veterans v. United States Dep't OF Veterans Affairs
  962 F.2d 136· 2d Cir.· 1992-03-19 ·cited 8×
  The court held that 38 U.S.C. § 3205 survives rational basis scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause, as it reasonably furthers legitimate governmental interests in deficit reduction, preventing remote heir inheritance, and limiting fiduciary abuse. The court also held that th
• Tyson v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.
  958 F.2d 756· 7th Cir.· 1992-03-02 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment, finding the appeal frivolous and awarding sanctions against the appellant's counsel.
• United States v. Bennett
  956 F.2d 1476· 8th Cir.· 1992-02-25 ·cited 8×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Trial Court Rulings
  The court held that the trial court erred in granting a judgment of acquittal on the conspiracy count, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdicts on the drug possession and firearm charges.
• The Nat'l Wildlife Fed'n v. The Agric. Stabilization & Conservation Serv.
  955 F.2d 1199· 8th Cir.· 1992-02-05 ·cited 8×·via Arbitrary, Capricious, Or Abuse Of Discretion Standard
  The court vacated the district court's judgment and remanded the case because subsequent amendments to the relevant statutes provided for a good-faith exemption and graduated sanctions, which required reconsideration by the Secretary of Agriculture.
• Nidia Gutierrez-Rogue v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  954 F.2d 769· D.C. Cir.· 1992-02-04 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the petitioner's due process claim was premature because the administrative reopening procedure provides an adequate opportunity to challenge facts officially noticed by the Board of Immigration Appeals.
• Tex. PIG Stands, Inc. v. Hard Rock Cafe Int'l, Inc.
  951 F.2d 684· 5th Cir.· 1992-01-29 ·cited 8×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Attorney'S Fees
  The term "pig sandwich" is a protectable descriptive mark capable of registration and trademark protection when it has acquired secondary meaning in the minds of consumers. Although Hard Rock willfully infringed TPS's mark, the trial court properly reversed the jury's finding of
• Burda v. M. Ecker Co.
  954 F.2d 434· 7th Cir.· 1992-01-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the worker's claim challenging federal tax withholding was properly removed to federal court and dismissed for failure to state a claim, but remanded the issue of sanctions for reconsideration.
• United States v. Logan
  949 F.2d 1370· 5th Cir.· 1991-12-20 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the convictions of Logan and Stanley, finding no reversible error in the admission of evidence or the application of legal standards.
• United States v. Angelica
  951 F.2d 1007· 9th Cir.· 1991-12-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that restitution under the VWPA cannot be ordered for acts not underlying the offense of conviction, and that interest and penalties for past due restitution cannot be assessed for offenses committed before the relevant statutory amendment.
• Deckard v. Deckard
  590 So. 2d 35· Fla. 4th DCA· 1991-12-04 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the rehabilitative alimony award was not an abuse of discretion, but the award of attorney's fees was based on an error of law.
• In re PAN Am. Corp. v. PAN Am. World Airways, Inc.
  950 F.2d 839· 2d Cir.· 1991-12-03 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court erred in abstaining from transferring the Coker actions because its reasoning was based on inappropriate considerations, but affirmed the abstention for the Rosenkranz action.
• James A. Cummings Inc. v. Larson
  588 So. 2d 1066· Fla. 4th DCA· 1991-11-13 ·cited 8×
  A passenger has no duty to warn a driver of excessive speed unless the passenger knows or should know the vehicle is being operated unsafely and has sufficient time and opportunity to warn or protest. Trial courts have discretion to refuse consideration of evidence presented for
• Eastman Kodak Co. v. Westway Motor Freight, Inc.
  949 F.2d 317· 10th Cir.· 1991-11-12 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the market value rule was the proper measure of damages for destroyed film under the Interstate Commerce Act, and that the carrier failed to prove special reasons or mitigation failures to justify deviation from this rule.
• United States v. Fawbush
  946 F.2d 584· 8th Cir.· 1991-10-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court erred in departing upward from the sentencing guidelines based on psychological injury and victim age, as these factors were either not sufficiently proven or already accounted for in the guidelines.
• United States v. Cooper
  942 F.2d 1200· 7th Cir.· 1991-09-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defendants' convictions and sentences were supported by sufficient evidence and proper legal reasoning, affirming the district court's decisions.
• Mariani-Giron v. Heriberto Acevedo-Ruiz
  945 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1991-09-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the plaintiffs' motion to alter or amend the judgment of dismissal, as the plaintiffs failed to respond to a show cause order and did not properly appeal the underlying judgment.
• Charla Branch-Hines v. Hebert
  939 F.2d 1311· 5th Cir.· 1991-09-03 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the exclusion of plaintiff's testimony regarding emotional distress was an abuse of discretion and plain error, and that the jury's award of damages below the stipulated back pay amount was an abuse of discretion.