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

• Manchester Ins. & Indem. Co. v. Rodriguez
  331 So. 2d 372· Fla. 3d DCA· 1976-05-04 ·cited 2×
  Manchester Insurance & Indemnity Company appeals a trial court's order awarding it only $375 in equitable distribution from a $11,183.78 judgment recovered by the estate of a deceased minor in a wrongful death action. The appellate court affirms, holding that the trial judge did
• J. M. D. v. State
  328 So. 2d 521· Fla. 3d DCA· 1976-03-23 ·cited 2×
  The appellate court affirmed the juvenile court's order transferring the juvenile to adult criminal court for trial.
• State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Tote
  325 So. 2d 57· Fla. 3d DCA· 1976-01-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding only $500 for the personal injury protection lien.
• In re Mullendore v. Mullendore
  527 F.2d 1031· 10th Cir.· 1975-12-31 ·cited 2×
  The court held that failure to comply with General Order 44 or list a contingent fee contract as an executory contract does not bar attorneys' fees, and that while the trial court erred in its interpretation of 18 U.S.C. § 155, the fee award was not an abuse of discretion.
• Speight v. Vernita Speight
  319 So. 2d 197· Fla. 3d DCA· 1975-09-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in dividing joint savings accounts and awarding attorney's fees and costs, as the evidence supported the findings and no abuse of discretion was shown.
• Inmates OF the Suffolk Cnty. Jail v. Eisenstadt
  518 F.2d 1241· 1st Cir.· 1975-07-17 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in ordering the city to continue funding the Bail Appeal Project to prevent frustration of its prior single-cell occupancy order.
• AETNA Life Ins. Co. & Aerodex, Inc. v. DeANGELIS
  317 So. 2d 106· Fla. 3d DCA· 1975-06-24 ·cited 2×
  Aetna Life Insurance Company and Aerodex, Inc. appealed from orders denying a motion for summary judgment on class action grounds and directing notice to the class. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's orders, finding that the class definition, while potentially broad,
• Brennan v. Thor, Inc.
  516 F.2d 999· 4th Cir.· 1975-05-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dissolving an injunction restraining violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act when the defendant demonstrated compliance and the injunction was causing embarrassment.
• Indep. Meat Packers Ass'n v. Butz
  514 F.2d 1119· 8th Cir.· 1975-04-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in issuing a preliminary injunction against new beef grading standards pending a full hearing.
• United States v. Bell
  510 F.2d 1095· 5th Cir.· 1975-04-04 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in excluding defense impeachment evidence, admitting evidence of other crimes, or in the prosecutor's comment on the defendant's failure to testify.
• Hydromechaniki v. MacDONALD Constr. Co.
  511 F.2d 475· 8th Cir.· 1975-02-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the dismissal of an involuntary bankruptcy petition was not an abuse of discretion when the petitioning creditors failed to solicit additional creditors or demonstrate fewer than twelve existed after being given notice and opportunity.
• Broward Cnty. v. Alsdorf
  306 So. 2d 535· Fla. 4th DCA· 1975-01-24 ·cited 2×
  The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's decision, finding no reversible error and holding that while best practice is to recast amended pleadings in their entirety, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in permitting an amendment showing only the spe
• Biderman v. Rogers C. B. Morton
  507 F.2d 396· 2d Cir.· 1974-11-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction regarding motor vehicle permits pending an Environmental Impact Statement.
• Rhodes v. State
  301 So. 2d 132· Fla. 3d DCA· 1974-10-08 ·cited 2×
  Florida appellate court affirmed defendant's convictions for accessory after the fact and possession of burglary tools, rejecting his claim that the trial court erred in denying a new trial motion based on a witness's changed testimony, because defense counsel was aware of the in
• Kennedy v. Kennedy
  298 So. 2d 525· Fla. 2d DCA· 1974-08-14 ·cited 2×
  In a marital dissolution modification case, the court affirmed the trial court's denial of V. Jackson Kennedy's motion to quash a subpoena duces tecum and request for protective order. The appellate court found that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in requiring Kenned
• Neckman v. Neckman
  298 So. 2d 534· Fla. 3d DCA· 1974-07-09 ·cited 2×
  In a dissolution of marriage case, the wife appealed the trial court's award of $1,000 per month in child support, arguing it was inadequate based on the husband's substantial reported income and net worth. The appellate court affirmed, finding no clear abuse of discretion given
• Conley Motor Express, Inc. v. Russell
  500 F.2d 124· 3d Cir.· 1974-07-02 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the preliminary injunction was properly granted because the appellants failed to demonstrate that their dispute with Conley involved an employer-employee relationship, which is a prerequisite for exemption from antitrust laws.
• United States v. Hill
  495 F.2d 1245· 5th Cir.· 1974-06-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that each fraudulent check constituted a separate offense, and there was sufficient evidence to convict the defendants.
• United States v. Gennaro J. Angiulo
  497 F.2d 440· 1st Cir.· 1974-05-31 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendant waived his Sixth Amendment right to be tried in the vicinage by moving for a venue transfer, and the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying his subsequent request to withdraw that motion.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Power Res. Corp.
  495 F.2d 297· 10th Cir.· 1974-04-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the SEC's three-year delay in prosecuting its case, without diligent effort to move the action forward, constituted a failure to prosecute justifying dismissal under Rule 41(b).
• Peters v. Kiff
  491 F.2d 967· 5th Cir.· 1974-03-27 ·cited 2×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard On Appeal
  The court held that the denial of a continuance was not an abuse of discretion and that the evidence presented did not establish a prima facie case of systematic jury discrimination.
• Coman v. Coman
  492 F.2d 273· 3d Cir.· 1974-02-21 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the husband's brother and sister were not indispensable parties to the alimony award, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding alimony in gross rather than through a trustee.
• United States v. Dupart
  483 F.2d 1393· 5th Cir.· 1973-09-17 ·cited 2×·via Abuse Of Discretion In Denying Continuance
  The court held that the prosecutor's closing argument did not necessitate a mistrial and any prejudice was cured by the jury instructions.
• B. W. Butler, Inc. v. Byran Anderman
  279 So. 2d 907· Fla. 4th DCA· 1973-06-29 ·cited 2×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For New Trial Motions
• Patricia Russell Designs, Inc. v. Gans
  277 So. 2d 801· Fla. 3d DCA· 1973-05-22 ·cited 2×
• Lerer Realty Corp. & Apex Supply Co. v. MFB Mut. Ins. Co.
  474 F.2d 410· 5th Cir.· 1973-02-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the policy's "Repair or Replace" endorsement requires actual repair or replacement to recover replacement cost; otherwise, recovery is limited to actual cash value.
• Angell v. State
  271 So. 2d 37· Fla. 3d DCA· 1972-12-19 ·cited 2×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard On Appeal
  Nicholas Angell appealed his conviction for sale and possession of heroin, challenging the imposition of concurrent 5-year sentences and the denial of a continuance motion. The Florida appellate court affirmed the conviction but vacated the possession sentence, holding that when
• United States v. Springer
  478 F.2d 43· 9th Cir.· 1972-11-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a temporary injunction was improperly granted without a final judgment and proof of irreparable harm.
• United States v. Benson
  469 F.2d 222· 8th Cir.· 1972-11-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the appellant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea.
• LAM Chuen Ching ([ AXX XXX XXX ]) v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  467 F.2d 644· 3d Cir.· 1972-10-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Board of Immigration Appeals did not abuse its discretion in denying the petitioner's motion to reopen deportation proceedings.
• Carroll Dunscombe v. Beach Club Colony OF Stuart, Inc.
  264 So. 2d 465· Fla. 4th DCA· 1972-07-17 ·cited 2×
• United States v. Coats
  458 F.2d 192· 10th Cir.· 1972-04-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to set aside bond forfeiture, as the surety acquiesced to the conditions and justice did not require setting aside the forfeiture.
• United States v. Clark
  456 F.2d 1375· 10th Cir.· 1972-03-03 ·cited 2×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Continuance
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying motions for separate trials or continuances, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdicts of guilty for mail fraud.
• United States v. Alphonso R. Randolph
  456 F.2d 132· 3d Cir.· 1972-02-28 ·cited 2×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Discovery Rulings
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict and that the denial of the discovery motion was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. King
  453 F.2d 9· 1st Cir.· 1972-01-04 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the appellant's motion for severance and that sufficient evidence existed to convict the appellant of bank robbery.
• In re Penn Cent. Transp. Co.
  454 F.2d 9· 3d Cir.· 1972-01-04 ·cited 2×
  The court held that while a reorganization court has broad power, ordering the sale proceeds of mortgaged property into a central depository without sufficient justification constitutes an abuse of discretion and improperly infringes upon bondholders' contractual rights.
• In re The Wingreen Co. v. Reorganization
  452 F.2d 637· 5th Cir.· 1971-12-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying additional attorneys' fees when the initial retainer was deemed sufficient compensation for services rendered in a complex reorganization proceeding.
• Metro. Life Ins. Co. v. Trudy Heaver
  253 So. 2d 908· Fla. 2d DCA· 1971-11-05 ·cited 2×
  Metropolitan Life Insurance Company appeals an attorney fee award of $18,000 granted to the beneficiary Trudy Heaver in a life insurance policy dispute. The court affirmed the fee award, holding that Florida Statute § 627.0127(1) mandates reasonable attorney fees against an insur
• Hoover v. State
  252 So. 2d 872· Fla. 3d DCA· 1971-09-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse discretion in denying the defendant's motion for mistrial and request for a curative instruction.
• United States v. Wyant John LaMONT
  447 F.2d 1311· 9th Cir.· 1971-08-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the denial of a continuance was not an abuse of discretion and affirmed the conviction, noting that the sentence on one count was concurrent with others not appealed.
• YEE Chien WOO v. Rosenberg
  445 F.2d 277· 9th Cir.· 1971-07-01 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Immigration and Naturalization Service's finding of firm resettlement was not an abuse of discretion and should have been accepted by the District Court.
• Jewell C. Curtis v. Curtis
  248 So. 2d 204· Fla. 2d DCA· 1971-05-19 ·cited 2×
  The appellate court affirmed the trial court's temporary custody award to the father and denial of the mother's special equity claim, finding no abuse of discretion.
• Bilger v. Mar. Overseas Corp.
  439 F.2d 707· 9th Cir.· 1971-03-24 ·cited 2×
  The court held that no specific finding on res ipsa loquitur was required when the district court made express findings on negligence and unseaworthiness, and that denying the belated request to call a witness was not an abuse of discretion.
• Kimball v. United States
  437 F.2d 921· 8th Cir.· 1971-02-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a continuance and that any error in admitting evidence of car keys was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Hersey Benn v. Borden's Starlac DRY Milk Product
  438 F.2d 523· 9th Cir.· 1971-02-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a prisoner leave to file a complaint in forma pauperis when the complaint failed to state a claim.
• United States v. Spadoni
  435 F.2d 448· D.C. Cir.· 1970-11-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse her discretion in failing to order a presentencing investigation and report when the defendant explicitly requested to be sentenced without one.
• FMC Corp. v. Keizer Equip. Co.
  433 F.2d 654· 6th Cir.· 1970-11-04 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the motion to intervene as untimely.
• Francesco Paolo la Franca v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  433 F.2d 992· 2d Cir.· 1970-10-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the denial of the motion to reopen deportation proceedings was not an abuse of discretion.
• Olin's Miami Rent-A-Car, Inc. v. Jorgenson
  239 So. 2d 518· Fla. 3d DCA· 1970-09-29 ·cited 2×
  Defendants Olin's Rent-A-Car and operator Lieber appealed from a jury verdict for plaintiff Jorgenson in a negligence action arising from an automobile accident. The appellate court affirmed the judgment, holding that defendants failed to properly plead affirmative defenses and t
• Lowe v. Shearer
  239 So. 2d 86· Fla. 4th DCA· 1970-07-24 ·cited 2×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For New Trial Motions
  A pedestrian injured in an automobile accident sued the drivers and owners of two vehicles involved in the collision. The trial court granted new trials to both the plaintiff (against the Lowe defendants) and the defendants (the Ingrams), finding the jury verdict against manifest