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

• United States v. Lino Catabran
  884 F.2d 1288· 9th Cir.· 1989-09-08
  The court held that a district court lacks jurisdiction under Rule 32 to hear challenges to a presentence report after sentence imposition, and that denying a Rule 35 motion without considering disputed presentence report values was not an abuse of discretion when the issue was n
• Quinn v. State
  549 So. 2d 208· Fla. 2d DCA· 1989-08-18 ·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Expert Testimony
  Thomas Jerome Quinn appeals his DUI manslaughter conviction after being struck by the trial court's refusal to allow a defense expert witness to testify about blood-alcohol analysis using different testing methods. The court reversed, finding that the trial judge abused its discr
• Porter Thompkins, III v. Powell
  547 So. 2d 348· Fla. 3d DCA· 1989-08-15
  A father appealed an order denying modification of his $500 monthly child support obligation, claiming substantial change in circumstances due to reduced work hours and changed medical insurance availability for his child with Down's Syndrome. The court affirmed the denial, findi
• Lakota Contractors Ass'n v. United States Dep't OF Health & Human Servs.
  882 F.2d 320· 8th Cir.· 1989-08-11
  The court held that the federal agency had discretion not to restrict bidding to Indian contractors and did not abuse that discretion.
• Hernandez v. Whiting
  881 F.2d 768· 9th Cir.· 1989-08-04
  A district court must consider less drastic alternatives before dismissing a prisoner's pro se civil rights suit for failure to appear due to incarceration.
• Ellis v. Gail Council
  546 So. 2d 801· Fla. 3d DCA· 1989-08-01
  The Third District Court of Appeal reviewed a paternity and child support order, affirming the trial court's determination of the child's support needs (including special medical expenses for cystic fibrosis) but reversing and remanding the father's proportional share of child su
• Forest Sales Corp. v. Bedingfield
  881 F.2d 111· 4th Cir.· 1989-07-31
  In diversity actions, postjudgment interest is governed by the federal rate under 28 U.S.C. § 1961, and denial of attorney's fees for litigating postjudgment interest is not an abuse of discretion.
• Whiteside & Co., Inc. v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n
  883 F.2d 7· 5th Cir.· 1989-07-24
  The court affirmed the SEC's order, finding substantial evidence supported the SEC's conclusions regarding net capital violations, reporting requirements, and sanctions.
• United States v. Frankhauser
  878 F.2d 1571· 1st Cir.· 1989-07-14 ·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Trial Court Rulings
  The court held that the district court did not err in severing the appellant's trial, denying a lengthy continuance, or in refusing to grant a new trial based on alleged withholding of exculpatory material.
• Pfeiffer v. Harry Shapiro, M.D., P.C.
  878 F.2d 657· 2d Cir.· 1989-07-05
  The court held that the district court exceeded its discretion in dismissing the action for failure to file a pretrial order when the record did not fairly attribute fault to the plaintiff.
• Hallman v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  879 F.2d 1244· 5th Cir.· 1989-07-03
  The court held that the Immigration and Naturalization Service's position was substantially justified, thus affirming the denial of attorneys fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act.
• Gulf S. Pipeline Co. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n
  876 F.2d 431· 5th Cir.· 1989-06-28
  The court held that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) properly delegated authority to the Director of the Office of Pipeline and Producer Regulation to reject filings, not just accept them.
• Davis v. La. State Univ.
  876 F.2d 412· 5th Cir.· 1989-06-28 ·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Denying Leave To Amend
  The court held that the transferee court correctly applied the choice of law rules of the state in which it sits following a transfer from a district where personal jurisdiction over the defendant could not be obtained.
• Little Earth OF United Tribes, Inc. v. United States Dep't OF Hous. & Urban Dev.
  878 F.2d 236· 8th Cir.· 1989-06-23
  The court affirmed the district court's decision, finding no clear error in its findings of fact or law regarding HUD's actions and foreclosure.
• Seguro de Servicio de Salud de Puerto RICO v. McAUTO Sys. Grp., Inc.
  878 F.2d 5· 1st Cir.· 1989-06-20
  The court held that even if a trial court has the power to consolidate separate arbitration proceedings, it should not exercise that power if it would prejudice a party by forcing them to forego a contractually mandated arbitration locale, especially when the need for consolidati
• Istvan Kele v. Carlson
  877 F.2d 775· 9th Cir.· 1989-06-08
  The court held that while the Parole Commission's discretion is broad, it is bound by its own regulations, allowing review for violations of those regulations.
• Jorden, Jr. v. Nat'l Guard Bureau
  877 F.2d 245· 3d Cir.· 1989-06-06
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment by improperly reviewing the Air Force Board for the Correction of Military Records' decision as if it were a judicial ruling, and that the Board's proceedings lacked the necessary attributes for preclusive
• State of Minn. v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd.
  875 F.2d 179· 8th Cir.· 1989-05-17
  The court held that the Merit Systems Protection Board acted reasonably in labeling the employee's reliance on a lower court opinion as a willful violation of the Hatch Act.
• COX v. Wyrick
  873 F.2d 200· 8th Cir.· 1989-04-26
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a motion for reconsideration of a habeas corpus petition denial, as the new rule cited was inapposite and the prior decision was the law of the case.
• Delucia v. Egan
  540 So. 2d 937· Fla. 2d DCA· 1989-04-07
  The court affirmed the trial judge's grant of a new trial based on the verdict being against the manifest weight of the evidence, applying the deferential abuse-of-discretion standard of review.
• Power Lift, Inc. v. Weatherford Nipple-Up Sys., Inc.
  871 F.2d 1082· Fed. Cir.· 1989-04-05
  The court held that the Oklahoma statute providing relief from forfeiture in contract cases is not preempted by federal patent law and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in applying it to reinstate a patent license and award attorney fees.
• United States v. Bosquez-Villarreal
  868 F.2d 1388· 5th Cir.· 1989-03-02
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's motion for release pending trial.
• S.C. Pipeline Corp. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n
  868 F.2d 650· 3d Cir.· 1989-03-01
  The court held that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) did not abuse its discretion in dismissing a pipeline's complaint seeking a price reduction under certain gas purchase contracts, as the complaint was barred by a prior settlement agreement.
• United States v. Inez Aiken
  867 F.2d 965· 6th Cir.· 1989-02-16 ·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard On Appeal
  The court held that a judgment does not abate upon the death of a party if the death occurs after the final judgment has been entered. It also held that the suit against the decedent as an 'agent' under the Surface Mining Act was proper and that his illness did not constitute exc
• Castillo-Sicairos v. United States Parole Comm'n
  866 F.2d 262· 8th Cir.· 1989-01-25
  The court held that the Parole Commission did not abuse its discretion by considering information from dismissed counts when calculating the offense severity rating, and that the plea agreement did not prohibit such consideration.
• Phipps v. Phylliss King
  866 F.2d 824· 6th Cir.· 1988-12-20
  The court held that a district court must state the reasons for denying an application to proceed in forma pauperis.
• United States v. Shiomos
  864 F.2d 16· 3d Cir.· 1988-12-19
  The court held that a trial judge has the discretion to sua sponte order jury sequestration, even over a defendant's objection, to protect the defendant's constitutional right to a fair trial and the integrity of the judicial process.
• Garland Farnsworth and John L. Johnson v. City OF Kan. City
  863 F.2d 33· 8th Cir.· 1988-12-19
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the action with prejudice for failure to comply with discovery orders and in awarding attorneys' fees.
• Carnes v. Revels
  534 So. 2d 900· Fla. 5th DCA· 1988-12-08
  Wife's appeal of child support award of $780 per month was partially successful; the trial court did not abuse its discretion in setting that amount, but erred in requiring $350 monthly to be placed in trust, which would leave insufficient funds for the child's needs.
• Peck v. Garfield
  862 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1988-11-30
  The court held that the magistrate did not abuse his discretion in denying the motion for a new trial, affirming the jury's findings on contributory negligence, the damage award, and the submission of punitive damages.
• The Sioux Tribe OF Indians v. The United States
  862 F.2d 275· Fed. Cir.· 1988-11-23
  The court held that the Claims Court erred in denying the tribes' motion for relief from a stipulation and judgment entered without their express authorization, contrary to their instructions.
• Coleen R. Roberts v. Coll. OF THE Desert
  861 F.2d 1163· 9th Cir.· 1988-11-22
  The court held that Title VII does not preempt § 1983 claims for constitutional violations and that a protected property interest can arise from mutual understandings. The court also found the district court erred in reinstating the full damages award after a remittitur.
• Arnulfo M. Diaz v. SAN Jose Unified Sch. Dist.
  861 F.2d 591· 9th Cir.· 1988-11-17
  The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court's approval of the 1988-89 student assignment plan, finding it was an appealable final order and did not abuse discretion in its implementation.
• United States v. Trupiano
  860 F.2d 307· 8th Cir.· 1988-10-31
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for a reduction of sentence.
• Bills v. The United States
  857 F.2d 1404· 10th Cir.· 1988-09-29
  The court held that dismissal for lack of prosecution was not an abuse of discretion, and that Utah law properly limited damages to out-of-pocket expenses because the decedent died from causes unrelated to the alleged tort.
• White v. A.L. Lockhart
  857 F.2d 1218· 8th Cir.· 1988-09-27 ·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Continuance
  The court held that the denial of a continuance was not a constitutional error, and thus affirmed the dismissal of the habeas petition.
• United States v. DAY
  857 F.2d 1184· 8th Cir.· 1988-09-22
  The court held that the Small Business Administration (SBA) did not abuse its discretion in foreclosing on a loan after the borrowers failed to make deferred payments.
• United States v. Still
  857 F.2d 671· 9th Cir.· 1988-09-20 ·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Expert Testimony
  The court held that the jury instructions did not constitute plain error and the exclusion of expert testimony was not reversible error.
• United States v. Garcia
  854 F.2d 1280· 11th Cir.· 1988-09-14
  The admission of a transcript of a recorded meeting and the denial of related motions for continuances and a new trial were proper.
• United States v. Maynes-Ortega
  857 F.2d 686· 10th Cir.· 1988-09-14
  Evidence discovered accidentally during a lawful search for a different offense is admissible, and a new trial based on cumulative or irrelevant newly discovered evidence is not warranted.
• Rothie Louise Harris v. Pac. Floor Mach. Mfg. Co.
  856 F.2d 64· 8th Cir.· 1988-09-07
  The court held that the district court did not err in excluding the plaintiff's expert opinion on product defectiveness due to inadequate warning, as admissibility of evidence lies within the trial judge's discretion.
• In re Sealed Case
  856 F.2d 268· D.C. Cir.· 1988-09-02
  The court held that while the SEC properly asserted law enforcement investigatory privilege and attorney work product immunity, the district court erred by failing to balance the competing interests required for these qualified privileges, necessitating a remand.
• Shapiro v. Ewing Kauffman
  855 F.2d 620· 8th Cir.· 1988-09-01
  The court affirmed the denial of a change of venue and the jury's verdict, finding no abuse of discretion or error in the trial court's proceedings.
• United States v. Pagel
  854 F.2d 267· 7th Cir.· 1988-08-16 ·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  The court held that the stop and search of the vehicle were lawful under parole search regulations and Fourth Amendment jurisprudence, and the exclusion of defense photographs was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States Fire Ins. Co. & Travelers Ins. Co. v. Coachmen Indus., Inc.
  528 So. 2d 1351· Fla. 1st DCA· 1988-08-08
• Royal Saxon, Inc. v. Jaye
  536 So. 2d 1046· Fla. 4th DCA· 1988-08-03
  Royal Saxon, Inc., a cooperative association, sued unit owner Mildred Jaye for enforcement of building rules and to compel surrender of a unit key. After a 12-day jury trial consolidating multiple disputes, the trial court found Jaye the prevailing party and awarded her $87,375 i
• Lynn v. Chin Heung Int'l, Inc.
  852 F.2d 1221· 9th Cir.· 1988-08-01
  The court held that the Guam trial court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the case for failure to prosecute under Guam R.Civ.P. 41(b), as local courts are not bound to follow Ninth Circuit interpretations of parallel federal rules.
• Jordan v. The Sch. Bd. OF Broward Cnty.
  531 So. 2d 976· Fla. 4th DCA· 1988-07-27 ·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For New Trial Motions
  A trial court does not abuse its discretion in granting a motion for a new trial when testimony regarding subsequent remedial measures is admitted in violation of a pretrial motion in limine, even if the other stated grounds for the new trial are invalid.
• Gaudette v. Panos
  852 F.2d 30· 1st Cir.· 1988-07-27
  The court held that dismissal of the complaint was an abuse of discretion when the plaintiff had substantially complied with a discovery order, and the failure to inform the court of compliance was a minor oversight not warranting such a drastic sanction.
• Orzechowski v. Applegate
  528 So. 2d 971· Fla. 2d DCA· 1988-07-20
  Florida appellate court affirmed trial court's grant of eight weeks summer visitation to father but struck a deposit requirement that would have violated his constitutional right of access to courts.