Abuse Of Discretion (Standard Of Review)

12,337 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 1,658 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Zuelzke Tool & Eng'g Co., Inc. v. Anderson DIE Castings, Inc.
  925 F.2d 226· 7th Cir.· 1991-02-22 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a party's reliance on another entity to handle litigation, without making a formal appearance in court, does not constitute excusable neglect or an appearance requiring notice under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
• Lockhart v. Sullivan
  925 F.2d 214· 7th Cir.· 1991-02-19 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the case for want of prosecution and in denying the motion to reinstate under Rule 59(e) due to the plaintiff's pattern of delay and inconsistent explanations.
• United States v. Badger
  925 F.2d 101· 5th Cir.· 1991-02-14 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty pleas or in finding he was not a minimal or minor participant, but erred in imposing a mandatory three-year supervised release term based on misinformation.
• Halliburton Co. v. Schlumberger Tech. Corp.
  925 F.2d 1435· Fed. Cir.· 1991-02-13 ·cited 8×
  The court held that Halliburton did not engage in inequitable conduct by failing to disclose certain prior art references to the PTO because the withheld references were cumulative or less material than those already considered, and there was no intent to mislead.
• Deniece Scales v. J.C. Bradford & Co.
  925 F.2d 901· 6th Cir.· 1991-02-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in limiting discovery and in failing to find a prima facie case of disparate impact discrimination, but did not err in denying prejudgment interest or in its initial determination of attorney hourly rates.
• United States v. Wolak
  923 F.2d 1193· 6th Cir.· 1991-01-18 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the defendant's conviction but remanded for resentencing, finding that the upward departure from the Sentencing Guidelines was not justified by the circumstances presented.
• Snider v. Circle K Corp.
  923 F.2d 1404· 10th Cir.· 1991-01-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a Title VII settlement agreement is not a contract for labor or services under Oklahoma law, and that the district court erred in submitting the breach of settlement agreement claim to the jury because Title VII claimants are not entitled to a jury trial.
• Blumenfeld v. Stuppi
  921 F.2d 116· 7th Cir.· 1990-12-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding psychiatric testimony as a discovery sanction and in denying a motion for a new trial based on an allegedly inadequate damages award.
• Spiller v. Ella Smithers Geriatric Ctr.
  919 F.2d 339· 5th Cir.· 1990-12-18 ·cited 8×
  The court held that summary judgment was properly granted on all claims and that sanctions under Rule 11 were appropriate, though the amount of attorney fees awarded needed recalculation due to the appellee's failure to mitigate.
• Inez Patchell v. RED Apple Enters.
  921 F.2d 157· 8th Cir.· 1990-12-10 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the denial of Red Apple's motions for JNOV and a new trial, and also affirmed the district court's fee award to Patchell's attorneys.
• United States v. Fortenberry
  919 F.2d 923· 5th Cir.· 1990-12-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the admission of certain evidence did not constitute reversible error and that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, denying the petition for rehearing.
• Pasco Cnty. v. Franzel
  569 So. 2d 877· Fla. 2d DCA· 1990-11-09 ·cited 8×
  Pasco County appealed a trial court's order denying its petition to condemn part of the Franzels' farm for the Collier Parkway Extension. The appellate court affirmed the denial, finding the County abused its discretion by failing to adequately study relevant factors—including en
• Diamontiney v. Borg
  918 F.2d 793· 9th Cir.· 1990-11-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not err in granting the preliminary injunction or in denying the motion for contempt, as reasonable steps were taken to ensure the inmate's access to the courts.
• United States v. Haney
  914 F.2d 602· 4th Cir.· 1990-10-25 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the joinder of indictments and the admission of evidence of a prior Georgia robbery were proper.
• United States v. Jackson
  914 F.2d 1050· 8th Cir.· 1990-09-17 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not err in its Batson ruling, admitting evidence seized from a sub-let room, or in enhancing the sentence for firearm possession.
• Ry. Labor Executives' Ass'n v. Interstate Commerce Comm'n & United States
  914 F.2d 276· D.C. Cir.· 1990-09-14 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) reasonably interpreted and applied the relevant statutes in denying labor protection for employees of a non-applicant carrier and in treating a subsidiary's acquisition of rail lines as a transaction subject to discreti
• United States Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n v. Gurnee INN Corp.
  914 F.2d 815· 7th Cir.· 1990-09-13 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting injunctive relief, awarding back pay, and awarding compounded prejudgment interest.
• Carter C. Crookham and John Coster v. Crookham
  914 F.2d 1027· 8th Cir.· 1990-09-12 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing a Rule 11 sanction on plaintiffs' counsel for failing to conduct a reasonable inquiry into the law before filing pleadings.
• Dorina Mateyko v. Felix
  913 F.2d 744· 9th Cir.· 1990-09-06 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the trial court's judgment, holding that the appellant failed to present an adequate record for review of certain claims, and that a plaintiff who loses on federal claims and only prevails on a pendent state claim is not a prevailing party for attorney's fees u
• Anderson v. Blue Cross/Blue Shield OF Alabama
  907 F.2d 1072· 11th Cir.· 1990-08-01 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the health insurer's denial of benefits for rehabilitative services was not arbitrary or capricious, as the plan clearly excluded such admissions and the insured's stay was primarily for rehabilitation.
• BUD Brooks Trucking, Inc. v. Bill Hodges Trucking Co., Inc.
  909 F.2d 1437· 10th Cir.· 1990-07-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the plaintiffs' motion for relief under Rule 60(b) from a prior dismissal order.
• Kish v. McDONALD'S Corp.
  564 So. 2d 1177· Fla. 4th DCA· 1990-07-18 ·cited 8×
  Kish, a property owner, sued McDonald's for trespass, breach of contract, and ejectment after McDonald's used her rear property for parking spaces without permission to comply with city code requirements for a playground addition. The trial court initially granted a directed verd
• United States v. Thompson
  908 F.2d 648· 10th Cir.· 1990-07-13 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion by refusing to voir dire the jury about their exposure to a highly prejudicial newspaper article published during the trial.
• Barreto v. Citibank, N.A.
  907 F.2d 15· 1st Cir.· 1990-07-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the complaint as a sanction for the plaintiffs' counsel's failure to answer interrogatories and appear for a scheduled conference.
• Doherty v. U.S. Dep't of Just.
  908 F.2d 1108· 2d Cir.· 1990-06-29 ·cited 8×
  The Attorney General has broad, essentially unreviewable discretion under 8 U.S.C. § 1253(a) to reject an alien's designated country of deportation if he determines deportation there would be prejudicial to United States interests. However, when an alien seeks to reopen deportati
• Royal BED & Spring Co., Inc. v. Famossul Industria E Comercio de Moveis Ltda.
  906 F.2d 45· 1st Cir.· 1990-06-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the case on the grounds of forum non conveniens, finding Brazil to be the most convenient forum.
• Montgomery Ward & Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  904 F.2d 1156· 7th Cir.· 1990-06-13 ·cited 8×·via Abuse Of Administrative Discretion
  A bargaining order is an abuse of discretion when the Board imposes it without specifically articulating why traditional remedies would be inadequate, particularly where substantial time has passed and circumstances have materially changed since the unfair labor practices occurre
• Crabtree v. Muchmore
  904 F.2d 1475· 10th Cir.· 1990-06-04 ·cited 8×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Sanctions
  The plaintiffs failed to state a cause of action under § 1983 against the attorney defendants because they did not allege specific facts showing an agreement or concerted action with the judge sufficient to establish either a conspiracy or joint participation under Lugar v. Edmon
• Peterson v. Gen. Motors Corp.
  904 F.2d 436· 8th Cir.· 1990-05-31 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the District Court did not abuse its discretion in its evidentiary rulings, jury instructions, or denial of motions for a new trial or to vacate the judgment.
• United States v. Alvarez-Quiroga
  901 F.2d 1433· 7th Cir.· 1990-05-10 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a district judge is not required by Rule 11 to inform a defendant of the Sentencing Guidelines range before accepting a guilty plea, and that the defendant failed to show a fair and just reason to withdraw his plea.
• McLEAN v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  901 F.2d 204· 1st Cir.· 1990-04-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Board of Immigration Appeals did not abuse its discretion in denying the alien's application for a waiver of deportation.
• In re Huey P. (Mio) Grey and Ann P. (Mio) Grey v. Huey P. (Mio) Grey
  902 F.2d 1479· 10th Cir.· 1990-04-26 ·cited 8×
  The Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court's orders, holding that the security agreement included after-acquired property and that the debtor's sale of collateral constituted willful and malicious injury, rendering the debt nondischargeable.
• United States v. Kolby Kristiansen
  901 F.2d 1463· 8th Cir.· 1990-04-25 ·cited 8×
  The court held that while the trial court erred in excluding a question about the characteristics of a mental disease, the error was not prejudicial, and the prosecutor's misstatement during closing arguments was cured by jury instructions.
• McDONALD v. United States
  898 F.2d 466· 5th Cir.· 1990-04-18 ·cited 8×
  A defendant does not waive its objection to insufficient service by engaging in discovery and participating in scheduling after raising the defect in its answer, and ignorance of proper service requirements does not constitute good cause for failure to serve within the prescribed
• SMS Data Prods. Grp., Inc. v. The United States
  900 F.2d 1553· Fed. Cir.· 1990-04-11 ·cited 8×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Discovery Rulings
  The court affirmed the Board's decision, holding that FDC's bid was not materially imbalanced and that SMS's appeal was frivolous, warranting double costs.
• Nickerson v. G.D. Searle & Co. & Ortho Pharm. Corp.
  900 F.2d 412· 1st Cir.· 1990-04-03 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a new trial was not warranted based on the jury's verdict, newly discovered evidence, or the district court's evidentiary rulings.
• W. Coast Theater Corp. v. City OF Portland
  897 F.2d 1519· 9th Cir.· 1990-03-26 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the district court's dismissal for lack of prosecution, summary judgment, sanctions, and Rule 4(j) dismissals, finding the appeal frivolous and awarding costs and attorney fees.
• Lowe v. City OF E. Chicago
  897 F.2d 272· 7th Cir.· 1990-03-09 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by dismissing the plaintiff's case with prejudice and denying his motion for a continuance.
• United States v. City OF Chicago
  897 F.2d 243· 7th Cir.· 1990-03-02 ·cited 8×
  The author concurs with the majority's observation regarding the decline of enthusiasm for quotas, but clarifies their historical necessity.
• Stokes v. Georgia-Pacific Corp.
  894 F.2d 764· 5th Cir.· 1990-02-22 ·cited 8×
  The court held that parol evidence was admissible to prove detrimental reliance, and that the award of interest from the date of judgment was proper.
• Creske v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  896 F.2d 250· 7th Cir.· 1990-02-20 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the tax court abused its discretion by denying litigation costs without providing a reasoned explanation.
• Ayers v. City OF Richmond
  895 F.2d 1267· 9th Cir.· 1990-02-12 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing sanctions on an attorney for failing to attend a settlement conference and that collateral estoppel barred the client's civil rights claims based on Fourth Amendment violations decided in state suppre
• Unity Ventures v. Cnty. OF Lake
  894 F.2d 250· 7th Cir.· 1990-01-29 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying attorney's fees to Lake County, as William Alter's lawsuit was not frivolous or brought in bad faith, particularly given the evolving legal landscape regarding ripeness at the time of filing.
• Campbell v. Ingersoll Milling Mach. Co.
  893 F.2d 925· 7th Cir.· 1990-01-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying leave to amend the complaint, excluding evidence of a prior sexual assault, or entering judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
• Edwards v. Occidental Chem. Corp.
  892 F.2d 1442· 9th Cir.· 1990-01-09 ·cited 8×
  The court held that an amended complaint naming the correct defendant relates back to the original filing date if the defendant received notice and knew or should have known of the mistake, and that a district court's finding of pretext in an employer's stated reasons for a promo
• United States v. Willis
  890 F.2d 1099· 10th Cir.· 1989-11-30 ·cited 8×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the defendant's motions to suppress, for acquittal, or in its jury instructions, and that the admission of rebuttal evidence was not an abuse of discretion.
• Vega v. City OF Pompano Beach
  551 So. 2d 594· Fla. 4th DCA· 1989-11-08 ·cited 8×
  The trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding expert testimony regarding whether environmental and water conditions at the property created a hazardous or deceptive situation, because the question of whether such conditions were hazardous was within the ordinary under
• Avon Davis v. Bowen
  894 F.2d 271· 8th Cir.· 1989-10-25 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Secretary of Health and Human Services did not abuse discretion in denying a contempt motion because the Secretary fully complied with the district court's order regarding attorney's fees.
• Duran v. Garrey Carruthers
  885 F.2d 1492· 10th Cir.· 1989-09-15 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding attorneys' fees and costs for post-judgment monitoring of a consent decree, even with a Special Master in place, and for services related to a withdrawn contempt motion that resulted in a settlement.
• The Lomas & Nettleton Co. v. Wiseley
  884 F.2d 965· 7th Cir.· 1989-09-01 ·cited 8×
  Attorney negligence in failing to attend a foreclosure sale does not constitute excusable neglect under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(1), and a party seeking to set aside a judicial sale on grounds of unjust enrichment must prove both that the successful bidder was enrich