Abuse Of Discretion (Standard Of Review)

12,338 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 1,659 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Robbins v. Brandt (In re Se. Banking Corp.)
  S.D. Fla.· 1995-02-15
  The court affirmed the bankruptcy court's order granting rehearing and its final judgment, holding that the artwork constituted 'inventory' exempt from ad valorem taxation because it was held for sale in the ordinary course of business.
• Holywell Corp. v. Bank of N.Y. (In Re Holywell Corp.)
  177 B.R. 991· S.D. Fla.· 1995-01-20
  The district court affirmed all five bankruptcy court orders, finding no abuse of discretion or legal error in the bankruptcy court's rulings on motions, judgments, and settlement approvals.
• Univ. Creek Plaza, Ltd. v. N.Y. Life Ins. (In Re Univ. Creek Plaza
  176 B.R. 1011· S.D. Fla.· 1995-01-03
  The court affirmed the bankruptcy court's orders denying confirmation of the debtor's plan of reorganization and dismissing the case, finding the plan was not proposed in good faith and was not fair and equitable.
• Richard v. Behavioral Healthcare Options, Inc.
  647 So. 2d 976· Fla. 2d DCA· 1994-12-14 ·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard On Appeal
  The court affirmed the granting of a temporary injunction but reversed the bond amount and remanded for further proceedings to determine the bond and enter a proper order with factual findings.
• State v. Trummert
  647 So. 2d 966· Fla. 4th DCA· 1994-12-07
  The appellate court affirmed the trial court's exclusion of DNA analysis results and witness testimony due to the state's failure to comply with discovery orders and the defendant's speedy trial rights.
• Clarke v. Clarke
  644 So. 2d 178· Fla. 5th DCA· 1994-10-28
• United States v. Camacho
  865 F. Supp. 1527· S.D. Fla.· 1994-10-19
  The court held that juror affidavits and a juror letter alleging internal jury deliberations, compromise, or speculation do not constitute extrinsic influences sufficient to warrant a new trial or juror interviews under Federal Rule of Evidence 606(b).
• Goldfarb v. Ins. Co. OF N. Am.
  642 So. 2d 586· Fla. 3d DCA· 1994-08-24
  The court affirmed the trial court's denial of class action certification, holding that plaintiffs were estopped by the law of the case doctrine after previously arguing claims were separate in federal court, and no abuse of discretion was demonstrated.
• In re Interactive Video Res., Inc.
  170 B.R. 716· S.D. Fla.· 1994-07-26
  The court affirmed in part and reversed in part the bankruptcy court's decision, compelling arbitration between Centec and IVR but not Fidelity, and affirming the denial of Centec's motion for relief from the automatic stay and the denial of rehearing.
• Carter v. Carter
  640 So. 2d 1171· Fla. 1st DCA· 1994-07-12
• Brandenburg v. Brandenburg
  634 So. 2d 315· Fla. 4th DCA· 1994-04-06
  The court held that the order, though designated final, was a temporary custody order and affirmed the trial court's decision.
• In the Interest of S.S.J.
  634 So. 2d 198· Fla. 1st DCA· 1994-03-21
  A mother appeals an order finding her child dependent and placing the child in the custody of the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services. The appellate court affirms the dependency finding but reverses the trial court's grant of intervention to an organization seeking t
• The Ass'n OF Sch. Consultants, Inc. v. Spillis Candela & P'rs, Inc.
  639 So. 2d 991· Fla. 3d DCA· 1994-01-26
• In re The Marriage of Frederic H. Warren v. Warren
  629 So. 2d 1079· Fla. 3d DCA· 1994-01-11
  The husband appeals a final judgment of dissolution of marriage involving a 37-year marriage. The appellate court affirmed the property distribution and award of permanent periodic alimony to the wife, but reversed and remanded the alimony amount because the trial court erroneous
• Jarrell v. Jarrell
  630 So. 2d 627· Fla. 4th DCA· 1994-01-05
• ZUR v. Yarone Degani
  629 So. 2d 244· Fla. 3d DCA· 1993-12-14 ·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Injunctions
  Rafael Zur appeals the trial court's denial of his motion to dissolve a temporary injunction preventing the sale of a rare World War II fighter aircraft (F-4U Corsair). The appellate court affirmed the injunction, finding that the original owner Wirth satisfied all three requirem
• Palm Beach Cnty. v. French
  627 So. 2d 1206· Fla. 4th DCA· 1993-12-01
  The appellate court affirmed the trial court's order granting a new trial after a jury verdict for the plaintiff, citing improper tactics by the defense that prejudiced the plaintiff and undermined the appearance of justice.
• McFATTEN v. State
  623 So. 2d 633· Fla. 1st DCA· 1993-09-14
  Eddie McFatten appeals his convictions for possession of cocaine and sale of cocaine within 1000 feet of a school, challenging the trial court's admission of a partially unintelligible tape recording and explanatory testimony from a confidential informant. The First District Cour
• Whitaker v. Interstate Commerce Comm'n (In Re Olympia Holding Corp.)
  161 B.R. 524· M.D. Fla.· 1993-09-10
  The court held that while the bankruptcy court had authority to enjoin the ICC's show cause order as it exceeded statutory authority, it abused its discretion by enjoining all future ICC proceedings.
• Walls v. Armour Pharm. Co.
  832 F. Supp. 1505· M.D. Fla.· 1993-09-01
  The court denied the defendant's motion for a new trial, finding no merit in its claims of prejudicial error regarding the admission of evidence, jury instructions, or counsel arguments.
• Pac. GAS Transmission Co. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n
  998 F.2d 1303· 5th Cir.· 1993-08-26
  The court held that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) did not act arbitrarily or capriciously in amending pipeline companies' optional certificates to increase initial rates before service commenced, nor did it abuse its discretion in denying rehearing.
• United States v. Elwood
  999 F.2d 814· 5th Cir.· 1993-08-23 ·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  The court affirmed the defendant's convictions but vacated his sentences and remanded for resentencing because the upward adjustment for a leadership role was not supported by sufficient reliable evidence.
• Khano v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  999 F.2d 1203· 7th Cir.· 1993-08-04
  The court held that the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) did not abuse its discretion in affirming the immigration judge's order of deportation and denial of asylum and withholding of deportation.
• Anderson v. Dep't OF Just.
  999 F.2d 532· Fed. Cir.· 1993-08-03
  The court held that the Administrative Judge abused her discretion in dismissing the appeal as untimely filed, as the appellant showed good cause for the one-day delay.
• Piluso v. Piluso
  622 So. 2d 117· Fla. 4th DCA· 1993-07-28
  Rosemary Piluso appealed a trial court's award of temporary support and suit money in a family law matter, arguing the court failed to make specific written findings as required by Robbie v. Robbie. The appellate court affirmed, holding that while trial courts should conduct the
• Mawby v. United States
  999 F.2d 1252· 8th Cir.· 1993-07-26 ·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  The court held that while admitting surprise evidence without bad faith was not an abuse of discretion, denying the appellant an opportunity to rebut that evidence was an abuse of discretion.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. French Int'l Corp.
  999 F.2d 1409· 9th Cir.· 1993-07-26
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board did not abuse its discretion in determining that a bargaining unit limited to employees in the hotel's housekeeping department was appropriate.
• De Souza v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  999 F.2d 1156· 7th Cir.· 1993-07-23
• Walton v. Jennings Cmty. Hosp., Inc.
  999 F.2d 277· 7th Cir.· 1993-07-21
  The court held that the district court did not err in excluding speculative testimony and irrelevant evidence, and that the defendant's statements were not the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injury.
• Benjamin v. Grosnick
  999 F.2d 590· 1st Cir.· 1993-07-20
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in dismissing the action for untimely service as to Embriano, but affirmed the dismissal as to Benjamin due to his failure to serve the correct complaint.
• King v. Captain Patterson
  999 F.2d 351· 8th Cir.· 1993-07-19
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the inmate's complaint, finding no clear error in the factual findings, no abuse of discretion in denying counsel, and that the jury trial demand was untimely.
• McKETHAN v. Tex. Farm Bureau
  996 F.2d 734· 5th Cir.· 1993-07-19
  The court held that the plaintiff's claims for age discrimination, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and slander were properly dismissed or rejected, and that the denial of a post-trial recusal motion was not reviewable due to failure to file a separate notice of appe
• Rosario Ramirez v. FOX Television Station, Inc.
  998 F.2d 743· 9th Cir.· 1993-07-14 ·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Sanctions
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in sanctioning the attorney for filing the same motion twice with a changed title.
• Haworth, Inc. v. Herman Miller, Inc.
  998 F.2d 975· Fed. Cir.· 1993-07-13
  The court held that a district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a motion to compel a nonparty to produce settlement documents when the requesting party had not yet attempted to obtain the documents from its opposing party in the primary litigation.
• JAY v. Sec'y OF the Dep't OF Health & Human Servs.
  998 F.2d 979· Fed. Cir.· 1993-07-13 ·via Arbitrary, Capricious, Or Abuse Of Discretion Standard
  The court held that the special master erred in granting summary judgment for HHS and denying it for the petitioners, as the undisputed evidence established an encephalopathy and vaccine causation as a matter of law.
• United States v. Murphy
  996 F.2d 94· 5th Cir.· 1993-07-13 ·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Expert Testimony
  The court held that the district court did not err in submitting a flight instruction, nor in admitting expert testimony, and that prosecutorial comments during closing arguments did not constitute misconduct or plain error.
• Quinn v. Neal
  998 F.2d 526· 7th Cir.· 1993-07-13
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in limiting cross-examination regarding abuse petitions and the defendant's ongoing relationship with the witness, as no sufficient nexus was shown to demonstrate bias or motive to lie.
• United States v. Jacinto Garcia-Orozco
  997 F.2d 1302· 9th Cir.· 1993-07-12 ·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  The erroneous admission of prior arrest and conviction evidence was not harmless and prejudiced the defendant, requiring reversal.
• Lewis v. Babbitt
  998 F.2d 880· 10th Cir.· 1993-07-12
  The court held that the National Park Service's decision to award the firewood concession permit to Firebox Inc. was not arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law.
• United States v. Shahrokh Ahangaran
  998 F.2d 521· 7th Cir.· 1993-07-09
  The district court did not abuse its discretion in ruling that 31 C.F.R. § 560.504 was not relevant to the case.
• Corliss Moody v. FMC Corp.
  995 F.2d 63· 5th Cir.· 1993-07-09
  The magistrate judge did not abuse her discretion in denying the plaintiffs' motion to amend their pleadings to include a new issue regarding the adequacy of warnings, nor in refusing to submit that issue to the jury.
• Turri v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  997 F.2d 1306· 10th Cir.· 1993-07-09
  The majority reversed the Board's decision, finding that the Board failed to consider factors relevant to extreme hardship in a deportation case.
• United States v. Adams
  996 F.2d 75· 5th Cir.· 1993-07-08
  The court held that a district court's refusal to depart downward from a sentencing guideline range is not reviewable on appeal unless the refusal was in violation of law or based on a mistaken belief that departure was legally impermissible.
• Capstick v. Allstate Ins. Co.
  998 F.2d 810· 10th Cir.· 1993-07-07 ·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For New Trial Motions
  The court held that the insurer's motion to dismiss the appeal was untimely because the motion for prejudgment interest tolled the time for filing the notice of appeal, and that the jury's award of compensatory and punitive damages for bad faith was supported by sufficient eviden
• Wheat v. Joseph L. Mass, M.D.
  994 F.2d 273· 5th Cir.· 1993-07-06
  The court held that the dismissal of the complaint and the refusal to allow amendment were proper because the claims were meritless and unsupported by factual allegations.
• United States v. Timbers Preserve
  999 F.2d 452· 10th Cir.· 1993-07-06
  The court held that a fugitive disentitlement theory properly supported the district court's denial of a motion to set aside a default judgment in a civil forfeiture case.
• United States v. Kermit Oris Bear Stops
  997 F.2d 451· 8th Cir.· 1993-07-06
  The court held that the exclusion of evidence regarding a prior sexual assault on the victim by other individuals was a violation of the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to present a defense, requiring reversal of the conviction on that count. However, convictions on other count
• Guillen-Garcia v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  999 F.2d 199· 7th Cir.· 1993-07-02
  The court held that the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) abused its discretion by relying exclusively on the petitioner's failure to admit guilt to determine rehabilitation, and remanded the case for reconsideration.
• United States v. HAM
  998 F.2d 1247· 4th Cir.· 1993-07-01 ·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  The court held that the admission of highly prejudicial evidence of child molestation, homosexuality, and abuse of women substantially outweighed its probative value and warranted vacating the convictions of Swami and Sheldon. The court also held that the evidence was insufficien
• Cedar Shake & Shingle Bureau v. City OF LOS Angeles
  997 F.2d 620· 9th Cir.· 1993-06-30
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by not abstaining under the Pullman doctrine because the state law preemption question was uncertain.