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

• In re The Est. OF Doris Stokes Brandt
  613 So. 2d 1365· Fla. 1st DCA· 1993-02-17 ·cited 6×
  An 83-year-old appellant sought to revoke the probate administration of his late wife's estate, claiming fraud and that he was omitted from a later will. The trial court struck his petition with prejudice when he failed to appear for a deposition scheduled just three hours after
• United States v. Davidson
  984 F.2d 651· 5th Cir.· 1993-02-16 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the upward departure, finding that while some reasons for departure were invalid, the district court would have imposed the same sentence based on the valid reason of extraordinary planning.
• Tampling v. State
  610 So. 2d 100· Fla. 1st DCA· 1992-12-16 ·cited 6×
  The court held that while jury tampering may be a crime involving dishonesty, the prosecutor's method of impeachment was improper, requiring reversal of the conviction.
• United States v. Pazzanese
  982 F.2d 251· 8th Cir.· 1992-12-07 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the chain of custody for the cocaine was sufficiently established, affirming the convictions, but that a prior New York conviction for criminal facilitation did not qualify as a 'felony drug offense' to trigger a mandatory minimum sentence, thus vacating the s
• Child's. Palace, Inc. v. Alveria Johnson and Michael Johnson
  609 So. 2d 755· Fla. 1st DCA· 1992-12-07 ·cited 6×
  The court held that prior convictions for writing worthless checks are admissible to impeach a witness's credibility, and excluding such evidence was an abuse of discretion.
• Carlton Mansell v. State
  609 So. 2d 679· Fla. 1st DCA· 1992-12-01 ·cited 6×
  Carlton Mansell appeals his cocaine possession conviction, arguing the trial court erred in finding the state's reason for a peremptory challenge to strike a black prospective juror was race-neutral and non-pretextual. The appellate court reverses, finding the trial court failed
• Andros W., Inc. v. Luella Lapointe
  609 So. 2d 103· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-11-24 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion in granting a new trial based on defense counsel's closing argument remarks.
• United States v. Ewing
  979 F.2d 1234· 7th Cir.· 1992-11-16 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in disallowing the defendant's attorney from testifying, as her testimony would have been cumulative, and affirmed the sentencing enhancement for firearm possession, finding sufficient evidence of connection to t
• United States v. Olson
  978 F.2d 1472· 7th Cir.· 1992-11-05 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to disclose the informant's address, nor in its jury instructions or evidentiary rulings, and that sufficient evidence supported the convictions.
• Fowler v. Land Mgmt. Groupe
  978 F.2d 158· 4th Cir.· 1992-10-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting judgment notwithstanding the verdict on the Equal Pay Act claim and that the issue of 'willfulness' for the statute of limitations should have been submitted to the jury.
• Stapleton v. Bisignano
  605 So. 2d 1010· Fla. 4th DCA· 1992-10-14 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a new trial, as reasonable jurors could have concluded zero future damages were warranted based on the evidence presented.
• United States v. Helton
  975 F.2d 430· 7th Cir.· 1992-09-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not err in determining restitution amounts, considering depositions at sentencing, or refusing to depart downward from the Sentencing Guidelines.
• Markham Duff-Smith v. Collins
  973 F.2d 1175· 5th Cir.· 1992-09-17 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a federal habeas petitioner is not entitled to relief based on claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, procedural default, insufficient evidence, or improper use of evidence, as these claims were either procedurally barred, lacked merit, or were based on
• Lockary v. Kayfetz
  974 F.2d 1166· 9th Cir.· 1992-09-09 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a district court may use its inherent power to sanction a legal foundation for misconduct, even if not covered by Rule 11 or § 1927, and affirmed sanctions for failure to plead with specificity and for frivolous antitrust claims. It reversed sanctions for the
• Johnson v. Hugo's Skateway
  974 F.2d 1408· 4th Cir.· 1992-09-08 ·cited 6×
  The dissenting judge would affirm the $175,000 punitive damages award, finding that the jury instructions and evidence presented sufficiently constrained the jury's discretion to comport with due process.
• United States v. Barksdale-Contreras
  972 F.2d 111· 5th Cir.· 1992-09-01 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, evidence was sufficient to support convictions, and various evidentiary and instructional challenges lacked merit.
• Carlton Johnson v. Webb Thompson, M.D.
  971 F.2d 1487· 10th Cir.· 1992-08-06 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not err in dismissing the section 504 claim and granting directed verdicts on the section 1983 claims, as the plaintiffs failed to establish discrimination solely based on handicap or provide evidence of constitutional violations.
• Blasband v. Rales
  971 F.2d 1034· 3d Cir.· 1992-07-31 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the plaintiff has standing to bring a derivative action despite a merger, but has not adequately pleaded demand futility.
• Martinez v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  970 F.2d 973· 1st Cir.· 1992-07-28 ·cited 6×·via Arbitrary, Capricious, Or Abuse Of Discretion Standard
  The court held that the Board of Immigration Appeals did not abuse its discretion in denying a waiver of deportation, as its decision was rational and based on the petitioner's significant criminal history.
• United States v. Rubenstein
  971 F.2d 288· 9th Cir.· 1992-07-24 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by abstaining and remanding the parties to state court to determine ownership of bail funds, as federal courts have jurisdiction over funds in their registry.
• Paris Kotsilieris v. Hymen P. Chalmers
  966 F.2d 1181· 7th Cir.· 1992-07-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that while the attorneys' negligent failure to make a timely jury demand could be considered sanctionable under 28 U.S.C. § 1927 as extreme negligence, the awarded amount of $5,546.25 was excessive due to a lack of specificity in the fee petition and the district c
• In re Excello Press
  967 F.2d 1109· 7th Cir.· 1992-06-11 ·cited 6×
  The court held that imposing sanctions under Rule 9011 for an attorney's failure to investigate an affirmative defense, when there was a split in authority on the issue and relevant information was not readily available, constituted an abuse of discretion.
• Elius Lamar Reed v. Amax Coal Co.
  971 F.2d 1295· 7th Cir.· 1992-06-04 ·cited 6×
  Summary judgment for the employer is affirmed because the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case of race discrimination under Title VII and his § 1981 claims are precluded by a prior administrative decision.
• CSX Transp., Inc. v. Tenn. State Bd. OF Equalization
  964 F.2d 548· 6th Cir.· 1992-05-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction because the plaintiff failed to establish reasonable cause to believe a violation of 49 U.S.C. § 11503 had occurred or was likely to occur.
• Hill v. Marshall
  962 F.2d 1209· 6th Cir.· 1992-05-01 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court erred in labeling a judgment notwithstanding the verdict as a remittitur and in setting aside the jury's punitive damages award, but affirmed the denial of the defendant's motions regarding liability and compensatory damages.
• United States v. Mathis
  963 F.2d 399· D.C. Cir.· 1992-05-01 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a D.C. robbery conviction based on 'stealthy seizure' does not qualify as a 'violent felony' under 18 U.S.C. § 924(e) because the statutory definition of force is less than Congress's intent. However, the court affirmed the denial of the motion to withdraw the
• Aurelia Scholar v. Pacific Bell
  963 F.2d 264· 9th Cir.· 1992-04-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a Title VII action is barred if not filed within 90 days of the EEOC's notice, even if the claimant did not personally receive the notice immediately.
• NEW York State Nat'l Org. FOR Women v. Terry
  961 F.2d 390· 2d Cir.· 1992-04-13 ·cited 6×
  The court should not have reversed sanctions against the attorney, as there were other valid grounds for imposing them, even if one ground was later reversed on appeal.
• United States v. Noland
  960 F.2d 1384· 8th Cir.· 1992-04-06 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of prior insurance claims to show motive and intent, nor in applying a sentencing enhancement for obstruction of justice based on the defendant's solicitation of false testimony from her children.
• Associated Indem. Corp. v. Fairchild Indus., Inc.
  961 F.2d 32· 2d Cir.· 1992-04-03 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in imposing Rule 11 sanctions because Fairchild could have reasonably believed its liabilities might exceed the $25 million threshold triggering excess insurer coverage.
• United States v. Valencia
  957 F.2d 1189· 5th Cir.· 1992-03-25 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to play a Spanish language tape recording to the jury, in omitting a lesser-included offense instruction, or in admitting hearsay statements offered to explain the DEA's conduct.
• Wallace v. Mulholland
  957 F.2d 333· 7th Cir.· 1992-02-20 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the judgment, holding that the trial judge acted within his discretion regarding evidence exclusion, judge's conduct, and attorney fee awards, and that sufficient evidence supported the jury's verdict.
• United States v. Deffenbaugh Indus., Inc.
  957 F.2d 749· 10th Cir.· 1992-02-18 ·cited 6×
  The court held that an affidavit submitted to the Department of Justice in lieu of appearing before a grand jury is not a "matter within the jurisdiction" of the Department for purposes of 18 U.S.C. § 1001, and that substantial claims attacking the technical validity of a grand j
• Ferguson v. Baisley
  593 So. 2d 319· Fla. 4th DCA· 1992-02-12 ·cited 6×
• Vild v. Visconsi
  956 F.2d 560· 6th Cir.· 1992-02-10 ·cited 6×
  The dissent argues that the predicate acts were sufficiently related to meet the continuity requirement for a RICO claim.
• Class v. City OF Seattle
  955 F.2d 1268· 9th Cir.· 1992-02-04 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in approving the settlement agreements and allocation plan, finding that the trustee had the authority to bind bondholders and that the settlement was fair, reasonable, and adequate.
• McBRIDE v. Coleman
  955 F.2d 571· 8th Cir.· 1992-01-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that compensatory sanctions for contempt are not barred by sovereign immunity, as they are necessary to enforce judicial orders and make injured parties whole.
• Prod. & Maint. Emps'. Local 504 v. Roadmaster Corp.
  954 F.2d 1397· 7th Cir.· 1992-01-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that Roadmaster violated ERISA by improperly amending its retirement plan and that the district court abused its discretion by denying plaintiffs' attorneys' fees.
• McGEE v. Equicor-Equitable HCA Corp.
  953 F.2d 1192· 10th Cir.· 1992-01-13 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the health plan did not limit rehabilitation to sixty days and that Equicor wrongfully denied coverage for the first two months of rehabilitative care at Meadowbrook Hospital.
• United States v. Moye
  951 F.2d 59· 5th Cir.· 1992-01-07 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of a prior drug offense, in its jury instructions regarding intent, or in limiting closing argument time.
• United States v. Reva Young
  952 F.2d 1252· 3d Cir.· 1991-12-31 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the defendant's actions in opening an unauthorized account and misrepresenting her signatory authority constituted bank fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1344(1), and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding certain evidence.
• United States v. Saver Hodge-Balwing
  952 F.2d 607· 1st Cir.· 1991-12-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the prosecutor's actions did not constitute reversible error, and the defendant received a fair trial despite minor improprieties.
• United States v. LeMAY
  952 F.2d 995· 8th Cir.· 1991-12-24 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a district court has discretion to reject a plea agreement if it believes the sentence is too lenient, and that a ten-year supervised release term is permissible under the relevant statutes.
• Jacquelyn L. Morris v. Am. Nat'l CAN Corp.
  952 F.2d 200· 8th Cir.· 1991-12-23 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying an enhanced attorney fee award without considering market compensation for contingency cases and substantial difficulty in finding counsel. The court affirmed the backpay termination and calculation.
• CTC Imports and Exports v. Nigerian Petroleum Corp.
  951 F.2d 573· 3d Cir.· 1991-12-19 ·cited 6×
  The court held that Aham was not a proper appellant, Tache's appeal from the denial of his reconsideration motion should be granted, and CTC's sanctions were proper.
• United States v. Tootick
  952 F.2d 1078· 9th Cir.· 1991-12-17 ·cited 6×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Severance
  The court held that the joint trial of defendants asserting mutually exclusive defenses resulted in manifest prejudice, constituting an abuse of discretion by the trial court.
• Mitchell v. Boyd Hobbs
  951 F.2d 417· 1st Cir.· 1991-12-04 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the postjudgment motion to vacate the consent judgment because the appellant failed to demonstrate extraordinary circumstances justifying a delayed appeal and waived the defense of insufficient service
• Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Manual Lujan
  951 F.2d 257· 10th Cir.· 1991-12-02 ·cited 6×·via Arbitrary, Capricious, Or Abuse Of Discretion Standard
  The court held that the Secretary of the Interior has the authority to order a lessee to provide records for an audit, even if those records pertain to a period outside the general statute of limitations for collecting royalties.
• United States v. Danny Wade Arthur (90-6080)
  949 F.2d 211· 6th Cir.· 1991-11-14 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court erred in excluding a confession under Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b)(3) due to insufficient corroboration, and that the refusal to allow a demonstration with a wig and cap was not reversible error.
• State Indus., Inc. v. Mor-Flo Indus., Inc.
  948 F.2d 1573· Fed. Cir.· 1991-11-14 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of enhanced damages, finding no abuse of discretion, and imposed sanctions for a frivolous appeal.