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

• Harris Mkt. Research v. Marshall Mktg. & Commc'ns, Inc.
  948 F.2d 1518· 10th Cir.· 1991-11-07 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the jury's verdicts were not irreconcilable, the admission of evidence was proper, the denial of discovery was not an abuse of discretion, and the award of attorneys' fees was appropriate.
• United States v. Daniels
  948 F.2d 1033· 6th Cir.· 1991-11-07 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting evidence of uncharged misconduct, in applying U.S.S.G. § 2A2.2 for sentencing, or in denying a downward departure for the defendant's role in the offense.
• Clow v. U.S. Dep't OF Hous. & Urban Dev.
  948 F.2d 614· 9th Cir.· 1991-11-05 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment for HUD, finding that HUD's denial of the Clows' mortgage assistance application was not arbitrary, capricious, or a clear error of judgment.
• United States v. Abdul-Aziz Rashid Muhammad
  948 F.2d 1449· 6th Cir.· 1991-10-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court had jurisdiction despite the failure to issue a physical writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum, that the admission of a post-arrest statement was not an abuse of discretion, and that sentencing enhancements for bodily injury, official victim
• Hong-Yee Chiu v. The United States
  948 F.2d 711· Fed. Cir.· 1991-10-29 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Claims Court did not abuse its discretion in determining the government's position was not substantially justified, entitling the plaintiff to attorney fees. However, the court reversed the calculation of the fee award, finding that cost-of-living adjustme
• Carver v. Bunch
  946 F.2d 451· 6th Cir.· 1991-10-09 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by dismissing the pro se plaintiff's complaint solely for failure to respond to a motion to dismiss, without considering the merits or the specific requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).
• United States v. Glick
  946 F.2d 335· 4th Cir.· 1991-10-08 ·cited 6×
  The court held that while the defendant's actions did not constitute aberrant behavior, the sentencing court did not abuse its discretion in departing downward based on diminished capacity.
• Rivera-Zurita v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  946 F.2d 118· 10th Cir.· 1991-10-04 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the Board of Immigration Appeals' order, finding substantial evidence supported the conclusion that the petitioner was incarcerated for over 180 days, thus precluding a finding of good moral character and statutory eligibility for relief.
• Garth Maag v. Wessler
  944 F.2d 654· 9th Cir.· 1991-09-23 ·cited 6×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Fee Awards
  The court held that awarding attorneys' fees to prevailing defendants in § 1983 actions requires a finding that the action was frivolous, unreasonable, and without foundation.
• United States v. Lily Borromeo
  945 F.2d 750· 4th Cir.· 1991-09-17 ·cited 6×
  The court agrees with the result that there was excusable neglect, but writes separately to clarify the proper analysis.
• United States v. Wayde Lynn Kurt
  945 F.2d 248· 9th Cir.· 1991-09-16 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district courts did not abuse their discretion in dismissing the criminal convictions without prejudice after finding violations of the Interstate Agreement on Detainers Act (IADA), based on a proper consideration of the factors outlined in Section 9(1) of
• Denison v. Swaco Geolograph Co.
  941 F.2d 1416· 10th Cir.· 1991-08-16 ·cited 6×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  The court affirmed the denial of the defendant's post-verdict motions, finding sufficient evidence supported the jury's verdict for the plaintiff on his ADEA claim.
• United States v. Poindexter
  942 F.2d 354· 6th Cir.· 1991-08-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by limiting closing arguments regarding the lack of fingerprint evidence and by criticizing defense counsel, denying one defendant a fair trial, but that such errors were harmless as to the other defendant due to strong
• Polys v. Trans-Colorado Airlines, Inc.
  941 F.2d 1404· 10th Cir.· 1991-08-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to preserve the issue of excluded expert testimony for appeal by not making an adequate offer of proof, and the exclusion was not plain error. The court also held that the plaintiffs failed to prove causation for their claimed injuries.
• West v. State
  584 So. 2d 1044· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-08-07 ·cited 6×
  John West appealed his convictions for armed burglary, false imprisonment, armed robbery, and sexual battery with a deadly weapon, challenging the trial court's dismissal of the first jury venire and the imposition of habitual offender sentences. The appellate court affirmed the
• United States v. Blakney
  941 F.2d 114· 2d Cir.· 1991-08-05 ·cited 6×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Severance
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the severance motion and properly considered the defendant's prior conviction for both offense level and criminal history calculations under the Sentencing Guidelines.
• Thompson v. Duke
  940 F.2d 192· 7th Cir.· 1991-08-02 ·cited 6×
• United States v. Tamez
  941 F.2d 770· 9th Cir.· 1991-07-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that 21 U.S.C. § 856(a)(2) applies to knowingly making a building available for drug distribution, not just 'crack houses,' and that co-conspirator statements were properly admitted. However, the court reversed the sentencing enhancement for being an organizer.
• In re Hall v. Hall
  939 F.2d 802· 9th Cir.· 1991-07-26 ·cited 6×
  A district court may dismiss a bankruptcy case for improper venue, but such dismissal must be without prejudice, and the court cannot make independent factual findings on bad faith filing, which requires remand to the bankruptcy court.
• Dep't OF Labor v. Occupational Safety & Health Review Comm'n
  938 F.2d 1116· 10th Cir.· 1991-07-11 ·cited 6×·via Arbitrary, Capricious, Or Abuse Of Discretion Standard
  The court held that the petitioner failed to meet its burden of proving Goltra had actual or constructive knowledge of a reasonable probability of injury that could be prevented by face shields.
• Giebelhaus v. Spindrift Yachts
  938 F.2d 962· 9th Cir.· 1991-07-10 ·cited 6×
  An attorney is not subject to Rule 11 sanctions if they did not personally sign the offending pleading, even if their name appears in type or they were lead counsel.
• United States v. Barrett
  937 F.2d 1346· 8th Cir.· 1991-07-03 ·cited 6×·via Abuse Of Discretion In Limiting Cross-Examination
  The court affirmed the conviction and sentence, finding sufficient evidence of the victim's physical incapacity and no abuse of discretion in evidentiary rulings or sentencing.
• United States v. Emond
  935 F.2d 1511· 7th Cir.· 1991-07-01 ·cited 6×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Severance
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying severance motions, and that sufficient evidence supported the mail fraud convictions.
• Crawford v. Sullivan
  935 F.2d 655· 4th Cir.· 1991-06-05 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the government's position regarding the claimant's social security benefits was substantially justified, thus denying attorney's fees under the EAJA.
• Pac. Reinsurance Mgmt. Corp. v. Ohio Reinsurance Corp.
  935 F.2d 1019· 9th Cir.· 1991-06-05 ·cited 6×
  The denial of a partial stay of arbitration is not appealable, temporary equitable orders in arbitration are confirmable, and the supersedeas bond order was not improper. However, the arbitration panel lacked jurisdiction over one party, CTR.
• United States v. Austin
  933 F.2d 833· 10th Cir.· 1991-05-13 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the exclusion of the defendant's prior medical records solely on the ground of remoteness was an abuse of discretion and prejudicial, requiring reversal.
• Knowlton v. Deseret Med., Inc.
  930 F.2d 116· 1st Cir.· 1991-04-19 ·cited 6×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  A manufacturer has a duty to warn foreseeable users of dangers associated with its product, even if the user is sophisticated, and the jury's finding of inadequate warning and proximate causation will be upheld if supported by sufficient evidence.
• Solo Serve Corp. v. Westowne Assocs.
  929 F.2d 160· 5th Cir.· 1991-04-18 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact regarding the defendant's alleged lease breaches, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying further discovery.
• Wyatt v. Cole
  928 F.2d 718· 5th Cir.· 1991-04-17 ·cited 6×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Fee Awards
  Monetary damages against private defendants are barred by good faith immunity, and attorneys fees against them are also barred. The state is liable for attorneys fees for its officials' enforcement of an unconstitutional statute, but the fee award calculation requires remand.
• Secretary OF Labor v. DeSISTO
  929 F.2d 789· 1st Cir.· 1991-03-29 ·cited 6×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by limiting the number of witnesses, which prevented a fair determination of the case, and vacated the judgment for a new trial.
• Donald v. Balfour J. Rast
  927 F.2d 379· 8th Cir.· 1991-03-01 ·cited 6×
  The dissenting judge believes the trial court erred in excluding evidence, thus denying the appellant a fair trial.
• Williamson v. Consol. Rail Corp. v. Nashville & Ashland City R.R. Co.
  926 F.2d 1344· 3d Cir.· 1991-02-28 ·cited 6×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For New Trial Motions
  The court held that ConRail did not have the right to control Williamson's actions, thus he was not an employee.
• Hughes v. City OF Fort Collins
  926 F.2d 986· 10th Cir.· 1991-02-25 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying sanctions under Rule 11, despite confusing the subjective and objective standards, because it ultimately found a good faith argument for modification of existing law.
• Narciso Vallez Melendez v. U.S. Dep't OF Just. & Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  926 F.2d 211· 2d Cir.· 1991-02-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that factual findings regarding a well-founded fear of persecution for asylum and withholding of deportation claims are reviewed under the substantial evidence standard, while the ultimate denial of asylum is reviewed for abuse of discretion. The court remanded the
• Eagle Assocs. v. Bank OF Montreal
  926 F.2d 1305· 2d Cir.· 1991-02-11 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment. The concurring opinion disagreed with the majority's reasoning regarding partnership representation.
• United States v. 27.93 Acres OF Land
  924 F.2d 506· 3d Cir.· 1991-01-29 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying discovery requests for the government's motive and prior appraisals, nor in excluding evidence of commercial value and internal valuations, as the DiSantos failed to demonstrate a reasonable probabilit
• United States v. Liebo
  923 F.2d 1308· 8th Cir.· 1991-01-15 ·cited 6×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For New Trial Motions
  The court held that while sufficient evidence supported the convictions, the district court abused its discretion in denying the motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence showing supervisory approval of the ticket purchase.
• Wilkinson v. Fed. Bureau OF Investigation
  922 F.2d 555· 9th Cir.· 1991-01-07 ·cited 6×
  The court held that an order denying a post-judgment motion to compel document production to enforce a settlement agreement is appealable, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion.
• Bode v. United States
  919 F.2d 1044· 5th Cir.· 1990-12-27 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the taxpayers' evidence was insufficient to support the awarded 600 hours of attorney fees, but that a higher hourly rate than the statutory $75 cap was justified for certain attorneys due to special factors. The court reversed the award of hours, affirmed the
• Harris v. Heinrich
  919 F.2d 1515· 11th Cir.· 1990-12-27 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by imposing Rule 11 sanctions without providing specific findings, especially given the conflicting indications that the pro se plaintiff's appeal was not frivolous.
• Caterino v. Barry
  922 F.2d 37· 1st Cir.· 1990-12-26 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the union and its members' motion to intervene in the liability phase of the lawsuit because the motion was untimely.
• Rivera v. Puerto RICO Tel. Co.
  921 F.2d 393· 1st Cir.· 1990-12-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in reversing its prior order allowing amendment of the notice of appeal, and affirmed the denial of the motion to extend time to appeal.
• Wash. Elec. Coop., Inc. v. Mass. Mun. Wholesale Elec. Co.
  922 F.2d 92· 2d Cir.· 1990-12-18 ·cited 6×
  The court held that while the Vermont Department of Public Service (VDPS) has the statutory capacity to intervene, it failed to meet the requirements for intervention as of right or permissive intervention under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
• United States v. Provost
  921 F.2d 163· 8th Cir.· 1990-12-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence, nor in denying an evidentiary hearing.
• United States v. Walker
  920 F.2d 513· 8th Cir.· 1990-12-03 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district judge's ex parte viewing of evidence did not warrant recusal, and the imposed sentence was within the court's discretion and not constitutionally violative.
• Johnson v. Sullivan
  919 F.2d 503· 8th Cir.· 1990-11-23 ·cited 6×
  The court held that when a petitioner provides uncontested proof of an increased cost of living justifying higher attorney fees under the EAJA, such enhanced fees should be awarded.
• United States v. Darin Ray Goodrich
  919 F.2d 1365· 9th Cir.· 1990-11-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court erred in departing upward from the Sentencing Guidelines based on the extent of the defendant's false declarations, as this factor was adequately considered by the Sentencing Commission.
• Stitt v. Williams
  919 F.2d 516· 9th Cir.· 1990-11-15 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the grant of summary judgment on all claims but reversed the award of Rule 11 sanctions, finding the district court abused its discretion in imposing them.
• United States v. Brenneman
  918 F.2d 745· 8th Cir.· 1990-11-08 ·cited 6×·via Manifest Abuse Of Discretion
  The court held that a district court may be influenced by the Sentencing Guidelines when imposing a pre-Guidelines sentence, provided the sentence is within statutory limits and not a gross abuse of discretion.
• Rixey v. W. Paces Ferry Hosp., Inc.
  916 F.2d 608· 11th Cir.· 1990-11-01 ·cited 6×·via Abuse Of Discretion (Appellate Review)
  The court held that the district court erred in granting motions for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and new trials, as there was sufficient evidence for the jury to find the doctor and hospital liable for medical malpractice.