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

• Manshack v. Sw. Elec. Power Co.
  915 F.2d 172· 5th Cir.· 1990-10-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the personal injury lawsuit without prejudice, nor in failing to strictly adhere to local rules regarding notice.
• United States v. Currency $267
  916 F.2d 1104· 6th Cir.· 1990-10-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying leave to further amend the claim.
• Roadway Express, Inc. v. Fuente Cigar, Ltd.
  749 F. Supp. 248· S.D. Fla.· 1990-10-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the shipper failed to establish a prima facie case under the Carmack Amendment because it did not prove the cigars were damaged at the time of delivery to the carrier, thus the trial court erred in denying the carrier's motion for involuntary dismissal.
• United States v. Heriberto Gonzalo Beltran
  915 F.2d 487· 9th Cir.· 1990-09-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to order the government to accept a subpoena for a confidential informer, as the informer's testimony was not material and favorable to the defense.
• Bustop Shelters OF Louisville, Inc. v. Classic Homes, Inc.
  914 F.2d 810· 6th Cir.· 1990-09-20 ·cited 2×
  A bankruptcy court does not abuse its discretion by refusing to allow a debtor to place a creditor in a separate class solely to obtain confirmation of a reorganization plan, and a creditor's claim is not impaired if the debtor's obligation remains unaltered.
• Black Ass'n OF NEW Orleans Fire Fighters (Banoff) v. The City OF NEW Orleans
  911 F.2d 1063· 5th Cir.· 1990-09-14 ·cited 2×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Attorney'S Fees
  The court held that the appeal of the attorney's fee award was timely, but remanded the case because the district court failed to provide sufficient reasoning for the amount awarded.
• In re Oxborrow v. Esposito
  913 F.2d 751· 9th Cir.· 1990-09-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the twenty-percent requirement for creditors to request an election for a Chapter 7 trustee is distinct from and independent of the twenty-percent requirement for creditors to vote in the election.
• Kaiser Dev. Co. v. City & Cnty. OF Honolulu
  913 F.2d 573· 9th Cir.· 1990-09-04 ·cited 2×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  The court held that the district court did not err in granting a directed verdict because the plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence of a regulatory taking, specifically that there was no economically viable use of the land.
• Indus. Acoustics Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  912 F.2d 717· 4th Cir.· 1990-08-30 ·cited 2×
  The National Labor Relations Board abused its discretion by failing to apply its own Peerless Plywood rule, which prohibits election speeches on company time within 24 hours of an election, to the union's soundcar broadcasts.
• Coopers & Lybrand v. Sun-Diamond Growers OF CA
  912 F.2d 1135· 9th Cir.· 1990-08-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred by dismissing the federal action instead of staying it, and that the Attwood rule requiring a stay applies retroactively.
• de PÉREZ v. Hosp. del Maestro
  910 F.2d 1004· 1st Cir.· 1990-08-13 ·cited 2×
  The appellate court held that the district court erred in granting the plaintiffs' motion for a new trial because the evidence was mixed and did not overwhelmingly favor the plaintiffs.
• Twin City Constr. Co. OF Fargo v. Turtle Mountain Band OF Chippewa Indians through its Chairman
  911 F.2d 137· 8th Cir.· 1990-08-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by refusing to entirely dissolve an injunction that prohibited tribal court proceedings, given a subsequent amendment to the tribal code that provided a jurisdictional basis for the tribal court.
• Lewellen v. Morley
  909 F.2d 1073· 7th Cir.· 1990-08-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellant failed to demonstrate good cause for the delay in serving the federal officers and that equitable estoppel did not apply. Therefore, the dismissal for failure to serve within the prescribed time was proper.
• Alton T. Webster v. Dep't OF the Army
  911 F.2d 679· Fed. Cir.· 1990-08-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the administrative judge erred in analyzing the reprisal defense and in considering the penalty without properly weighing mitigating factors like supervisor animus.
• Searcy v. Houston Lighting & Power Co.
  907 F.2d 562· 5th Cir.· 1990-08-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellant lacked standing to bring the claims and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing sanctions for frivolous filings. The appeal itself was deemed frivolous, warranting sanctions on appeal.
• Rosemount, Inc. v. United States Int'l Trade Comm'n
  910 F.2d 819· Fed. Cir.· 1990-08-02 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the ITC's denial of temporary relief, finding that the presumption of irreparable harm was rebutted by evidence and that the balance of harms and public interest factors supported denial.
• Travoris Garfield v. Kan. City S. Ry. Co.
  907 F.2d 841· 8th Cir.· 1990-07-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the action without prejudice and taxing costs against the plaintiff, nor in denying KCS's motion for relief from the dismissal.
• Larson v. United States
  907 F.2d 85· 8th Cir.· 1990-07-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that federal courts lack jurisdiction to review the substantive decisions of the Parole Commission for abuse of discretion, except for violations of the Parole Act or the Constitution.
• Theodis Lee Bogney v. A.W. Jones and Ellen M. Tucker
  904 F.2d 272· 5th Cir.· 1990-06-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by imposing Rule 11 sanctions without specific findings and conclusions, as the basis and amount were discernible from the record.
• Valero Interstate Transmission Co. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n
  903 F.2d 364· 5th Cir.· 1990-06-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that FERC had jurisdiction to modify its prior order to grant retroactive abandonment authorization, and that the decision to grant retroactivity was not arbitrary or capricious.
• In re The Grand Jury Proceedings OF December
  903 F.2d 1167· 7th Cir.· 1990-06-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendant failed to demonstrate a genuine and reasonable fear of testifying, and thus, the civil contempt order was affirmed.
• In the Complaint & Petition of Lloyd's Leasing Ltd. v. Bates
  902 F.2d 368· 5th Cir.· 1990-06-04 ·cited 2×
  A class action cannot be maintained in a limitation of liability proceeding, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying permission for late filed claims.
• Henderson v. Dep't OF Pub. Safety & Corr.
  901 F.2d 1288· 5th Cir.· 1990-05-29 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Rule 11 sanctions and that the procedures used did not violate due process, as the attorney had ample notice and opportunity to be heard.
• Templeton v. Nedlloyd Lines
  901 F.2d 1273· 5th Cir.· 1990-05-29 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a district court does not abuse its discretion by granting a voluntary dismissal under Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(2) even when a motion to join non-diverse parties is pending, as 28 U.S.C. § 1447(e) does not prohibit such a dismissal.
• Cook v. United States
  904 F.2d 107· 1st Cir.· 1990-05-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a property transfer pursuant to a divorce decree in Connecticut was a discharge of a marital obligation, entitling the transferee spouse to use the fair market value at the time of transfer as her tax basis.
• J.A. Jones Constr. Co. v. Steel Erectors, Inc.
  901 F.2d 943· 11th Cir.· 1990-05-18 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the district court's grant of a new trial, finding no abuse of discretion.
• Wilfredo Mendoza Perez v. U.S. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  902 F.2d 760· 9th Cir.· 1990-05-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Board of Immigration Appeals erred in denying the alien's requests for withholding of deportation and political asylum, as his credible testimony established a clear probability of persecution.
• D & S Grading Co., Inc. v. Secretary OF Labor
  899 F.2d 1145· 11th Cir.· 1990-04-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission's findings of serious and repeated violations, and the imposition of maximum penalties, were supported by substantial evidence and not an abuse of discretion.
• Cajun Elec. Power Coop., Inc. v. Riley Stoker Corp.
  901 F.2d 441· 5th Cir.· 1990-04-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a deposit into the court registry under Rule 67, made by a party seeking to satisfy an arbitration award while its validity was still being questioned, constituted timely payment under Louisiana law and did not improperly modify the award.
• Anita Founds., Inc. v. Ilgwu Nat'l Ret. Fund
  902 F.2d 185· 2d Cir.· 1990-04-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding attorney's fees to the employers under the MPPAA's fee-shifting provision, as the Fund's pursuit of additional withdrawal liability payments after settlement agreements was unreasonable and defied pub
• Laney v. Celotex Corp.
  901 F.2d 1319· 6th Cir.· 1990-04-25 ·cited 2×
• Britt v. Shovein
  559 So. 2d 749· Fla. 4th DCA· 1990-04-25 ·cited 2×
• Ines Torres-Matos v. ST. Lawrence Garment Co., Inc.
  901 F.2d 1144· 1st Cir.· 1990-04-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the employer was legally entitled to discontinue operations prior to the expiration of the collective bargaining agreement, and the union did not breach its duty of fair representation.
• Melva Pressey v. Kendall R. Patterson
  898 F.2d 1018· 5th Cir.· 1990-04-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that striking the City's answer and entering a default judgment for discovery abuse was an abuse of discretion, as the misconduct did not rise to the level of bad faith or willful abuse required for such a severe sanction.
• Allied Pilots Ass'n v. Am. Airlines, Inc.
  898 F.2d 462· 5th Cir.· 1990-04-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the dispute over American Airlines' drug and alcohol testing procedures constituted a minor dispute under the Railway Labor Act, which is subject to compulsory arbitration and not federal court jurisdiction. Therefore, the preliminary injunction was vacated.
• Mann v. G & G Mfg., Inc.
  900 F.2d 953· 6th Cir.· 1990-04-12 ·cited 2×
• The Asociacion Colombiana de Exportadores de Flores v. The United States
  901 F.2d 1089· Fed. Cir.· 1990-04-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the International Trade Administration's (ITA) determination regarding antidumping duties was supported by substantial evidence, and the Court of International Trade did not abuse its discretion in refusing to recalculate sales margins.
• Karl's Inc. v. Sunrise Computers
  901 F.2d 657· 8th Cir.· 1990-04-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying leave to amend the answer to assert a counterclaim for attorneys' fees, as the claim was not frivolous. However, the court affirmed the grant of summary judgment for the defendant on the plaintiffs' claims.
• Mester Mfg. Co. v. U.S. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  900 F.2d 201· 9th Cir.· 1990-04-10 ·cited 2×
  The Chief Administrative Hearing Officer (CAHO) had the authority to review an Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) award of attorneys' fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) for Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) hearings, and the government's position was substant
• Stiles v. Bargeron
  559 So. 2d 365· Fla. 1st DCA· 1990-04-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion by excluding critical blood test results as a sanction for a discovery violation, particularly in a paternity action where the child's needs are paramount.
• United States v. Rojas
  898 F.2d 40· 5th Cir.· 1990-03-29 ·cited 2×
  The referral of a defendant's motion to withdraw a guilty plea to a magistrate for an evidentiary hearing and recommendation is authorized by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and denying such a withdrawal is not an abuse of discretion when the defendant offers unsupported claims of innocen
• Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n v. The Erection Co., Inc.
  900 F.2d 168· 9th Cir.· 1990-03-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a district court must articulate its reasoning and findings when sealing a consent decree to allow for appellate review.
• Lunde v. Helms
  898 F.2d 1343· 8th Cir.· 1990-03-23 ·cited 2×
  The court holds it lacks jurisdiction to review orders denying disqualification and staying proceedings, but affirms the denial of preliminary injunctive relief.
• United States v. Kramer
  898 F.2d 81· 8th Cir.· 1990-03-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's motion for sentence reduction because the government did not breach the plea agreement.
• Blackburn v. Goettel-Blanton
  898 F.2d 95· 9th Cir.· 1990-03-05 ·cited 2×
  Hawaii law limits attorney's fees to twenty-five percent of the judgment amount, not the contract price or amount sought, and fees for defending a counterclaim are not subject to this ceiling.
• Ozark GAS Transmission Sys. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n
  897 F.2d 548· D.C. Cir.· 1990-02-27 ·cited 2×
  FERC's conditions attached to Ozark's blanket certificate were unreasonable because they negated the waiver's purpose, would cause Ozark to default on its loans, and precluded competition, thus constituting an abuse of discretion.
• Gelabert v. Lynaugh
  894 F.2d 746· 5th Cir.· 1990-02-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a prisoner who was sanctioned for frivolous litigation and ordered to pay a $10 fine could not file new lawsuits until the sanction was satisfied. The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the current suit for non-compliance.
• ROY v. Volkswagen OF Am., Inc.
  896 F.2d 1174· 9th Cir.· 1990-02-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in granting a new trial because the jury's verdict was not against the clear weight of the evidence.
• Alton J. Bailey v. Ryan Stevedoring Co., Inc.
  894 F.2d 157· 5th Cir.· 1990-02-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a motion to reopen a final judgment for attorney's fees, as a change in decisional law after judgment does not constitute grounds for relief under Rule 60(b).
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Int'l Swiss Invs. Corp.
  895 F.2d 1272· 9th Cir.· 1990-02-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the SEC's service of process abroad was valid under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the district court had the power to issue and enforce its injunction and contempt order.