Abuse Of Discretion (Standard Of Review)

12,259 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 1,650 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Thigpen v. United Parcel Servs., Inc.
  990 So. 2d 639· Fla. 4th DCA· 2008-09-10 ·cited 34×
  Plaintiff Thigpen sued UPS for retaliating against him for filing workers' compensation claims by fabricating grounds for his termination. The jury awarded him $6 million, but the trial court granted UPS a new trial after determining that highly prejudicial testimony about a form
• Leonard v. Leonard
  971 So. 2d 263· Fla. 1st DCA· 2008-01-07 ·cited 34×
  Robert K. Leonard appeals a trial court order modifying his alimony obligation from $2,500 to $1,325 per month based on claimed job loss. The appellate court reversed, finding the trial court erred by imputing income to Leonard without adequate evidentiary support or proper legal
• Buxton v. Buxton
  963 So. 2d 950· Fla. 2d DCA· 2007-09-05 ·cited 34×
  This case addresses how Florida courts should determine whether a cohabiting couple is in a "supportive relationship" under section 61.14(1)(b), which permits reduction or termination of alimony. The court reversed the trial court's denial of the former husband's motion to reduce
• Ocean Club Cmty. Ass'n, Inc. v. Curtis
  935 So. 2d 513· Fla. 3d DCA· 2006-04-05 ·cited 34×
  Ocean Club Community Association appeals from trial court orders awarding attorney's fees and costs to Peter Curtis, a former tennis director, on his successful unpaid wages claim. The appellate court affirms Curtis's entitlement to attorney's fees under Florida Statute § 448.08
• Davis v. State
  922 So. 2d 438· Fla. 5th DCA· 2006-03-10 ·cited 34×
  John Edward Davis appealed his convictions for first-degree murder and robbery. The court affirmed the murder conviction but reversed the robbery conviction because the trial court abused its discretion by denying a jury instruction on the afterthought theory, and any error in ad
• Wyon Dale Childers v. State
  936 So. 2d 585· Fla. 1st DCA· 2006-02-02 ·cited 34×
  Wyon Dale Childers was convicted of bribery and unlawful compensation for his role in purchasing the Pensacola Soccer Complex while serving as an Escambia County Commissioner. On appeal, the court affirmed the exclusion of evidence challenging his co-conspirator's plea agreement
• Charvester Anthony v. State
  854 So. 2d 744· Fla. 2d DCA· 2003-08-27 ·cited 34×
  Charvester Anthony appealed the revocation of his community control after pleading guilty to lewd and lascivious acts. The court reversed the revocation order in part, finding that the trial court erred in basing revocation on violations of conditions 1, 5, and 77, but affirmed t
• Distefano v. State Farm Mut. Auto. INS. Co.
  846 So. 2d 572· Fla. 1st DCA· 2003-04-28 ·cited 34×
  Carrie Distefano appealed the dismissal of her uninsured motorist insurance claim for giving false and misleading testimony during discovery. The First District affirmed the dismissal, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in imposing this sanction where Diste
• Lidsky Vaccaro & Montes, P.A. v. Morejon
  813 So. 2d 146· Fla. 3d DCA· 2002-03-13 ·cited 34×
  A law firm appeals sanctions imposed by a circuit appellate court in the form of attorney's fees under section 57.105 for appealing an insurance dispute case. The appellate court had dismissed the firm's appeal as frivolous based on three grounds: untimeliness, failure to provide
• Bouchard Transp. Co., Inc. v. Updegraff
  807 So. 2d 768· Fla. 2d DCA· 2002-02-20 ·cited 34×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard On Appeal
  Bouchard Transportation and Maritrans appeal certification of three classes in an oil spill damages action. The court affirmed certification of classes for residential and business property owners whose properties were physically invaded by pollution, but reversed certification o
• Aerolineas Argentinas, S.A. v. Gimenez
  807 So. 2d 111· Fla. 3d DCA· 2002-01-28 ·cited 34×
  Aerolíneas Argentinas appealed a trial court's denial of its motion to dismiss a wrongful death action for forum non conveniens. The appellate court reversed, holding that Argentina was an adequate alternate forum and that the private and public interest factors overwhelmingly fa
• United Kingdom v. Olumbummi Wood
  238 F.3d 1312· 11th Cir.· 2001-01-19 ·cited 34×
  British criminal defendants sought disclosure of sensitive U.S. law enforcement documents, including grand jury materials, work product, and wiretap information, through a letter rogatory under 28 U.S.C. § 1782. The district court declined to compel disclosure of most materials,
• Matthews v. State
  736 So. 2d 72· Fla. 4th DCA· 1999-06-09 ·cited 34×
  Rosemarie Matthews appeals an order revoking her probation for child abuse. The court affirms the revocation, holding that a probationer who accepts probation conditions cannot challenge their legality on appeal from a revocation order, that sufficient evidence supports the willf
• Hawk v. State
  718 So. 2d 159· Fla.· 1998-09-17 ·cited 34×
  Robert T. Hawk was convicted of first-degree murder and attempted first-degree murder in the brutal bludgeoning deaths of an elderly deaf couple. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the convictions and the consecutive thirty-year sentence for attempted murder, but vacated the deat
• Hardy v. State
  655 So. 2d 1245· Fla. 5th DCA· 1995-05-26 ·cited 34×
  Ralph Hardy appeals his convictions for forgery and uttering forged instruments, challenging the validity of his Faretta waiver of counsel and his sentences. The court affirmed his convictions, finding the Faretta inquiry adequate, but vacated his sentences because the trial cour
• United States v. Canino
  949 F.2d 928· 7th Cir.· 1991-11-27 ·cited 34×
  The court affirmed the jury verdict, finding no reversible error in the prosecutorial misconduct claims, the severance of a co-defendant, or the prosecutor's closing argument remarks on double jeopardy.
• United States v. Leichtnam
  948 F.2d 370· 7th Cir.· 1991-11-21 ·cited 34×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  The court held that the police's forced entry complied with the knock-and-announce statute, and that the defendant's argument regarding constructive amendment of the indictment was not preserved for appeal.
• United States v. Payne
  940 F.2d 286· 8th Cir.· 1991-06-28 ·cited 34×
  The court held that defendants' sentences were improperly enhanced based on crack cocaine amounts not charged in the indictment or proven at trial.
• DeBRUYNE v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc'y OF THE United States & Equitable Cap. Mgmt. Corp.
  920 F.2d 457· 7th Cir.· 1990-12-14 ·cited 34×
  The court affirmed summary judgment for the investment manager, finding no genuine issue of material fact regarding ERISA claims, securities law violations, or state insurance law claims due to preemption.
• Morgan B. Raiford v. Merrill Lynch
  903 F.2d 1410· 11th Cir.· 1990-06-22 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in confirming the arbitration award, as the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate manifest disregard of the law or that the award was arbitrary and capricious.
• United States v. Penson
  896 F.2d 1087· 7th Cir.· 1990-03-02 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the jury instructions were adequate and the admission of evidence of prior bad acts was proper under Rule 404(b) and the Shackleford test, and that the evidence was sufficient to identify the defendants as members of the conspiracy.
• Increase Minority Participation BY Affirmative Change Today OF Northwest Florida v. Firestone
  893 F.2d 1189· 11th Cir.· 1990-02-06 ·cited 34×
  The court held that after a full trial on the merits in an employment discrimination case, the ultimate question is whether intentional discrimination occurred, and findings of fact on this issue should be reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard, not by rigidly applying pro
• United States v. MacHor
  879 F.2d 945· 1st Cir.· 1989-06-29 ·cited 34×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no reversible error in the sufficiency of the evidence, the admission of co-conspirator statements, the denial of a motion to substitute counsel, the refusal to exclude the case agent, or the limitation of cross-examination.
• United States v. Galvan-Garcia
  872 F.2d 638· 5th Cir.· 1989-05-01 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, the admission of prior conviction evidence and subsequent references did not constitute plain error, the destruction of evidence was in good faith, and the sentencing enhancement was proper.
• United States v. Carmona
  873 F.2d 569· 2d Cir.· 1989-04-19 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting evidence of an address book entry, the defendant's alias statement during booking, or in enhancing the sentence based on corroborated hearsay testimony.
• Moore v. Moore
  543 So. 2d 252· Fla. 5th DCA· 1989-04-10 ·cited 34×
  William Moore appeals a divorce judgment awarding his former wife Carol permanent alimony, a disproportionate share of marital assets (58.5/41.5), and requiring him to maintain her as beneficiary on his life insurance. The court affirms the alimony award but reverses and remands
• Peteet v. DOW Chem. Co.
  868 F.2d 1428· 5th Cir.· 1989-04-04 ·cited 34×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For New Trial Motions
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting expert testimony linking herbicide exposure to cancer and in denying motions for a new trial and venue transfer.
• Bieneman v. City OF Chicago
  864 F.2d 463· 7th Cir.· 1988-12-13 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying class certification and that the plaintiff's claims were time-barred. The court also overruled prior precedent on federal preemption of state tort claims related to airport noise.
• Hill v. The Equitable Tr. Co. & Merchantile Safe Deposit & Tr. Co.
  851 F.2d 691· 3d Cir.· 1988-07-14 ·cited 34×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  The court held that its in banc decision in In Re: Data Access Sys. Sec. Litig. should be applied retroactively because plaintiffs had no reasonable basis to rely on prior inconsistent precedent, and affirmed the district court's judgment.
• Nissho-Iwai Am. Corp. v. Kline
  845 F.2d 1300· 5th Cir.· 1988-05-31 ·cited 34×
• Nachtsheim v. Beech Aircraft Corp.
  847 F.2d 1261· 7th Cir.· 1988-05-26 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding evidence of a prior similar accident and in redacting a portion of an incident report, as the evidence was not substantially similar or was unduly prejudicial.
• United States v. Valona
  834 F.2d 1334· 7th Cir.· 1987-11-20 ·cited 34×
  The court affirmed the conviction, finding no due process violation from pre-indictment delay, no error in denying discovery of the informant's record, and no outrageous government conduct.
• United States v. Calle
  822 F.2d 1016· 11th Cir.· 1987-07-27 ·cited 34×
  The court held that while the limitation on cross-examination of the government's witness was proper, the exclusion of the defense witness's testimony was an abuse of discretion and substantially prejudicial.
• Kurkowski v. Volcker
  819 F.2d 201· 8th Cir.· 1987-05-26 ·cited 34×
  The district court had jurisdiction to impose sanctions under Rule 11 even after a voluntary dismissal, and the sanctions were appropriate given the frivolous nature of the repeated lawsuits.
• United States v. Roenigk
  810 F.2d 809· 8th Cir.· 1987-02-04 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the district court committed reversible error by admitting prejudicial evidence and argument concerning prior cocaine transactions, which tended to cause the jury to decide the case on an improper basis.
• Schilling v. Walworth Cnty. Park & Planning Comm'n
  805 F.2d 272· 7th Cir.· 1986-11-05 ·cited 34×
  A district court abuses its discretion by dismissing a case sua sponte for want of prosecution without considering lesser sanctions, especially when the litigant is proceeding pro se and the case is relatively young.
• United States v. Greschner
  802 F.2d 373· 10th Cir.· 1986-09-25 ·cited 34×
  The court held that while the trial court erred in failing to admonish witnesses not to discuss their testimony and in allowing Government counsel at ex parte hearings, these errors were harmless or waived. The court also found no error in denying requests for an expert witness,
• Darryl H. v. Coler
  801 F.2d 893· 7th Cir.· 1986-09-09 ·cited 34×
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of a preliminary injunction, holding that while DCFS physical examinations of children implicate Fourth Amendment concerns, a warrant or probable cause is not constitutionally required in this context due to the state's compelling in
• Iervolino v. DELTA AIR Lines, Inc.
  796 F.2d 1408· 11th Cir.· 1986-08-15 ·cited 34×
  The dissenting judge argues that the majority opinion erred in its summary disposition of evidentiary issues and jury instructions, and that these errors warrant a new trial.
• United States v. Binder
  794 F.2d 1195· 7th Cir.· 1986-06-30 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the defendants' convictions were valid, affirming the trial court's rulings on the suppression of evidence, venue, and the denial of government-funded services.
• Lafarge Conseils ET Etudes, S.A. v. Kaiser Cement & Gypsum Corp.
  791 F.2d 1334· 9th Cir.· 1986-06-11 ·cited 34×
  The court held that Kaiser's motions to vacate the arbitration award and set aside the judgment confirming it were properly denied, and that Foley was entitled to attorney fees.
• Jones v. The Cont'l Corp.
  789 F.2d 1225· 6th Cir.· 1986-05-06 ·cited 34×
  The court held that attorney's fees could not be awarded against counsel for failing to amend a complaint or refuse to sign a pretrial order without evidence of bad faith or unreasonable multiplication of litigation, and that fees could not be awarded against the plaintiff for he
• Mahfouz El Shahawy, M.D. v. Harrison
  778 F.2d 636· 11th Cir.· 1985-12-16 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the physician's amended complaint sufficiently invoked federal court jurisdiction for antitrust claims, but civil rights, RICO, and pendent state law claims were properly dismissed.
• United States v. Smith
  757 F.2d 1161· 11th Cir.· 1985-04-15 ·cited 34×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Continuance
  The government's manipulation of evidence to create two separate crimes from a single transaction violates the Double Jeopardy Clause.
• Avila-Murrieta v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  762 F.2d 733· 9th Cir.· 1985-04-09 ·cited 34×·via Abuse Of Discretion In Denying Continuance
  The court held that an alien's lawful domicile for section 212(c) purposes terminates when the alien concedes deportability and fails to challenge the merits of the deportation order, even if awaiting discretionary relief.
• Ligman v. Jeffrey Tardiff, M.D.
  466 So. 2d 1125· Fla. 3d DCA· 1985-03-19 ·cited 34×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For New Trial Motions
  The trial court erred in directing a verdict for the defendant after a jury awarded damages, but did not abuse its discretion in granting a new trial.
• United States v. Allan Harvey Bibby (82-5705)
  752 F.2d 1116· 6th Cir.· 1985-01-14 ·cited 34×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Severance
  The court held that the misjoinder of certain tax counts was harmless error, and that while multiple conspiracies existed, the defendants were not prejudiced by being charged with a single conspiracy, except for Gillock's conspiracy conviction which was reversed due to prejudice
• Robbins v. Maggio
  750 F.2d 405· 5th Cir.· 1985-01-14 ·cited 34×
  The court held that orders denying appointment of counsel in civil cases are not immediately appealable under the collateral order doctrine.
• Betty and George Schofield v. Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc.
  461 So. 2d 152· Fla. 3d DCA· 1984-11-27 ·cited 34×
  The Schofields appealed a jury verdict in favor of Carnival Cruise Lines after their claim arising from an ALS patient's fall aboard a cruise ship. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's denial of a new trial and denial of leave to depose the jury foreman, finding no mate
• Murphy v. State
  459 So. 2d 337· Fla. 5th DCA· 1984-10-18 ·cited 34×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard On Appeal
  The trial court did not err in departing from the sentencing guidelines to impose a sentence based on the circumstances of the offense, as judicial discretion in sentencing has not been abrogated.