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

• DeJESUS v. Banco Popular de Puerto RICO
  951 F.2d 3· 1st Cir.· 1991-12-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by making unjustified reductions in attorney's fees, failing to adequately consider the complexity and duration of pretrial proceedings.
• Rolo v. Gen. Dev. Corp.
  949 F.2d 695· 3d Cir.· 1991-11-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that it lacked appellate jurisdiction over the order staying the class action pending other proceedings but had jurisdiction over the order effectively denying a preliminary injunction, which was an abuse of discretion.
• A. Hirsh, Inc. v. The United States
  948 F.2d 1240· Fed. Cir.· 1991-11-06 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the trade court's denial of attorney fees under EAJA, finding Hirsh was not a prevailing party, and affirmed the denial of Rule 11 sanctions against PATAC, finding no abuse of discretion.
• Whitaker v. Associated Credit Servs., Inc.
  946 F.2d 1222· 6th Cir.· 1991-10-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in setting aside a $500,000 judgment entered due to a clerical error in a Rule 68 offer of judgment, applying Rules 60(a) and 60(b)(1) and contract principles.
• Bowles v. United States
  947 F.2d 91· 4th Cir.· 1991-10-09 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the denial of costs and attorney's fees, holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding the government's position was not unreasonable.
• DOE v. State
  587 So. 2d 526· Fla. 4th DCA· 1991-09-27 ·cited 4×
  The trial court did not abuse its discretion in ordering disclosure of criminal investigative materials (names and addresses from a client list) as public records under the Public Records Act, despite third-party privacy claims by unnamed individuals who would be identified by th
• Sienkiewicz v. Aqua Lift, Inc.
  586 So. 2d 92· Fla. 4th DCA· 1991-09-25 ·cited 4×
  The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a trial court's entry of final judgment against a pro se litigant who failed to attend a calendar call, holding that striking his pleadings as a sanction was an abuse of discretion under the circumstances.
• Valdez v. State
  585 So. 2d 479· Fla. 3d DCA· 1991-09-10 ·cited 4×
• In re Pioneer Inv. Servs. Co. v. Pioneer Inv. Servs. Co.
  943 F.2d 673· 6th Cir.· 1991-09-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiffs should not be penalized for their attorney's negligence in filing proofs of claim late, especially when the notice was ambiguous and the debtor suffered no prejudice.
• Rodabaugh v. Sullivan
  943 F.2d 855· 8th Cir.· 1991-09-03 ·cited 4×
  A temporary restraining order (TRO) is insufficient to establish prevailing party status for attorney's fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) if the district court lacked jurisdiction to issue the TRO due to failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
• United States v. Reindeau
  947 F.2d 32· 2d Cir.· 1991-08-19 ·cited 4×·via Abuse Of Discretion In Limiting Cross-Examination
  The court held that restricting the cross-examination of the government's expert witness regarding whether the explosive device was designed as a weapon impermissibly prevented the defendants from presenting their defense, constituting reversible error.
• Jacquelyn L. Morris v. Am. Nat'l CAN Corp.
  941 F.2d 710· 8th Cir.· 1991-08-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not err in terminating backpay at the time of the reinstatement offer and in its calculation of backpay damages, but did err in denying an enhancement for attorney fees based on the contingent risk of litigation.
• Porter v. Deputy Martinez
  941 F.2d 732· 9th Cir.· 1991-08-12 ·cited 4×
  The court held that dismissal is an extreme sanction requiring consideration of multiple factors, and less drastic sanctions should be imposed when a pro se litigant, who is indigent and handicapped, shows attempts to comply and obtains counsel.
• In re Hammer v. Drago
  940 F.2d 524· 9th Cir.· 1991-07-31 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in denying the debtor's motion to set aside the default judgment because his culpable conduct led to the default, the motion was untimely, and he lacked a meritorious defense.
• United States v. Hines
  943 F.2d 348· 4th Cir.· 1991-07-31 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the officers had reasonable suspicion for an investigative stop, the subsequent seizure of evidence was lawful, the jury selection was proper, the admission of parole officer testimony was not an abuse of discretion, and the sentencing determinations under the
• Hoeber v. Local 30
  939 F.2d 118· 3d Cir.· 1991-07-30 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of the NLRB's petition for an injunction, finding that the union's lawsuit to enforce an arbitral award did not constitute an unfair labor practice and that injunctive relief was not just and proper.
• Bakker v. Grutman
  942 F.2d 236· 4th Cir.· 1991-07-29 ·cited 4×
  The appellate court affirmed the district court's denial of sanctions, finding no abuse of discretion in its determination that neither the plaintiffs nor their counsel engaged in sanctionable conduct under Rule 11.
• Souder v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp.
  939 F.2d 647· 8th Cir.· 1991-07-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence of causation for summary judgment to be inappropriate and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a continuance or certifying the judgment as final. Allegations of judicial bias agains
• Johnson v. U.S. Dep't OF the Treas.
  939 F.2d 820· 9th Cir.· 1991-07-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that dismissal for failure to prosecute was premature without a warning, and the district court should have ruled on the plaintiff's request for appointed counsel before dismissing the case.
• United States v. Menard
  939 F.2d 599· 8th Cir.· 1991-07-24 ·cited 4×
  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.
• Profile Gear Corp. v. Foundry Allied Indus., Inc.
  937 F.2d 351· 7th Cir.· 1991-07-16 ·cited 4×
  A district court did not abuse its discretion by entering a default judgment against a party that repeatedly lied to opposing counsel and the court, and failed to comply with discovery requests despite multiple lesser sanctions and clear warnings.
• United States v. Schnabel
  939 F.2d 197· 4th Cir.· 1991-07-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing supplemental voir dire, admitting tax returns and secretary's testimony, denying a motion for acquittal based on variance, or giving a willful blindness instruction.
• Prop. & Cas. Ins. Ltd. v. Cent. Nat'l Ins. Co. OF Omaha & William H. McCartney
  936 F.2d 319· 7th Cir.· 1991-07-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred in abstaining from exercising federal jurisdiction over the case.
• MAY v. Sullivan
  936 F.2d 176· 4th Cir.· 1991-06-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a district court's refusal to grant an upward adjustment to attorneys' fees for cost of living, based solely on an increase in the Consumer Price Index, does not constitute an abuse of discretion.
• Eisenberg v. Univ. OF NEW Mexico
  936 F.2d 1131· 10th Cir.· 1991-06-25 ·cited 4×
  The court held that an attorney's affidavit submitted to the court, even if not formally filed, falls within the scope of Rule 11, and that Rule 408 does not exclude such evidence when offered for purposes other than proving liability. Furthermore, the court found that the attorn
• Multnomah Legal Servs. Workers Union v. Legal Servs. Corp.
  936 F.2d 1547· 9th Cir.· 1991-06-25 ·cited 4×
  The court should hold that LSC's statutory or contractual right to inspect personnel files is subject to a reasonableness requirement, considering the purpose of ensuring grant compliance and employee privacy.
• Schlacter-Jones v. General Telephone OF California
  936 F.2d 435· 9th Cir.· 1991-06-17 ·cited 4×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Denying Leave To Amend
  State law claims arising from an employee's drug testing and discharge are preempted by Section 301 of the LMRA when their resolution requires interpretation of the collective bargaining agreement.
• In re Eastport Assocs. v. City OF LOS Angeles
  935 F.2d 1071· 9th Cir.· 1991-06-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the 1988 amendment to California Government Code § 66452.6 does not apply retroactively to revive expired development entitlements, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the City's motion to abstain.
• United States v. State OF Wash.
  935 F.2d 1059· 9th Cir.· 1991-06-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by denying attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988, as the subproceeding at issue was an action to enforce, not define, established treaty rights.
• United States v. van Kirk
  935 F.2d 932· 8th Cir.· 1991-06-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that an entrapment instruction was not warranted because the evidence was insufficient to support the defense.
• Smith v. Nat'l Health Care Servs. OF Peoria
  934 F.2d 95· 7th Cir.· 1991-05-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that sanctions under Rule 11 were improperly imposed on attorney J. Brian Heller because his arguments regarding the statute of limitations and the repleading of dismissed claims were made in good faith and had a basis in law at the time.
• Kelly v. Kelly
  579 So. 2d 398· Fla. 4th DCA· 1991-05-22 ·cited 4×
• United States v. Mavrokordatos
  933 F.2d 843· 10th Cir.· 1991-05-13 ·cited 4×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Sanctions
  The court held that the trial court erred in excluding government witnesses as discovery sanctions and that the government's notice of appeal was timely, divesting the trial court of jurisdiction.
• Clarke v. Stewart
  579 So. 2d 281· Fla. 3d DCA· 1991-05-07 ·cited 4×
  The trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting a new trial, as the record showed at least some negligence on the part of the appellant.
• In re Cohoes Indus. Terminal, Inc. v. Latham Sparrowbush Assocs.
  931 F.2d 222· 2d Cir.· 1991-05-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that an attorney should not be sanctioned under Bankruptcy Rule 9011 or 28 U.S.C. § 1927 for filing a Chapter 11 petition or for repeatedly asserting a claim if the petition had a reasonable basis and the claim was pursued until it was addressed on the merits.
• Doretha Bryant v. Brooklyn Barbecue Corp.
  932 F.2d 697· 8th Cir.· 1991-04-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing sanctions on plaintiff's counsel under Fed.R.Civ.P. 11, as the filing of the original complaint for an improper purpose constituted a violation.
• Haskell v. United States Dep't OF Agric.
  930 F.2d 816· 10th Cir.· 1991-04-16 ·cited 4×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  The court held that transaction reports prepared during an FNS investigation are admissible under the business records exception to the hearsay rule, and that the store owner received adequate due process. The court affirmed the district court's decision upholding the permanent d
• United States v. Scott
  929 F.2d 313· 7th Cir.· 1991-04-05 ·cited 4×
  A district court does not abuse its discretion by refusing to consider a defendant's secret expectations of a sentence when denying a motion to withdraw a guilty plea, especially when those expectations contradict sworn testimony.
• United States v. Perez-Magana
  929 F.2d 518· 9th Cir.· 1991-04-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a district court must provide adequate reasons for the degree of its departure from the Sentencing Guidelines, even when departing from the highest criminal history category.
• Minn. Mining & Mfg. Co. v. Norton Co.
  929 F.2d 670· Fed. Cir.· 1991-03-27 ·cited 4×
  It was an abuse of discretion to dismiss a declaratory judgment action for non-infringement based on a pending interference proceeding when the interference cannot decide or moot the infringement issues and the plaintiff will suffer significant harm from delay.
• Marx v. Kelly, Hart & Hallman, P.C.
  929 F.2d 8· 1st Cir.· 1991-03-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the complaint for deliberate failure to comply with discovery orders and court directives.
• Smith v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  926 F.2d 1470· 6th Cir.· 1991-03-08 ·cited 4×
  The Tax Court did not err in entering a default judgment for fraud penalties based on the Commissioner's well-pleaded allegations, nor did it abuse its discretion in denying the petitioner's motion to set aside the default.
• York Research Corp. v. Harris Landgarten
  927 F.2d 119· 2d Cir.· 1991-03-08 ·cited 4×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Sanctions
  The court held that York waived its right to object to the arbitrators by proceeding with arbitration after knowing the facts, but remanded the issue of attorneys' fees due to ambiguity in the award.
• Tolbert Dean Spradlin v. Lear Siegler Mgmt. Servs. Co., Inc.
  926 F.2d 865· 9th Cir.· 1991-02-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a forum selection clause in an employment contract is enforceable absent a clear showing of unreasonableness, fraud, or overreaching, and that the denial of oral argument was harmless error when no prejudice was demonstrated.
• Montilla v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  926 F.2d 162· 2d Cir.· 1991-02-12 ·cited 4×
  The Immigration Judge fully complied with the INS regulation regarding the right to counsel.
• H.J. Inc. v. Flygt Corp.
  925 F.2d 257· 8th Cir.· 1991-02-06 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the district court's award of attorney's fees, finding no abuse of discretion in reductions for limited success and inadequate documentation, and affirmed the award of post-judgment interest from the date of the original judgment.
• In re Riverside-Linden Inv. Co. v. Crake
  925 F.2d 320· 9th Cir.· 1991-02-05 ·cited 4×
  A bankruptcy court does not abuse its discretion in denying attorney's fees for investigations that do not benefit any interested party or are not statutorily required.
• Hiraldo-Cancel v. Aponte
  925 F.2d 10· 1st Cir.· 1991-02-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying judgment notwithstanding the verdict or in ordering reinstatement, as ample evidence supported the jury's finding of politically motivated dismissals and reinstatement was a proper equitable remedy.
• Love v. Reilly
  924 F.2d 1492· 9th Cir.· 1991-02-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Association failed to demonstrate that the attorney possessed a specialized skill or that such skill was necessary for the litigation, thus precluding an award of fees above the statutory cap.
• United States v. Garcia
  924 F.2d 925· 9th Cir.· 1991-01-30 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to substitute counsel and that the judge's conduct did not deprive the defendant of a fair trial.