Abuse Of Discretion (Standard Of Review)

12,338 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 1,661 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• 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.
• In re the Dep't OF Energy Stripper Well Exemption Litig. Appeal of Philip Kalodner Re Fee Application
  855 F.2d 871· Temp. Emer. Ct. App.· 1988-07-20
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in reducing the attorney's fee award requested by Kalodner.
• 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.
• Int'l Adhesive Coating Co., Inc. v. Bolton Emerson Int'l, Inc.
  851 F.2d 540· 1st Cir.· 1988-07-18
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting the damages expert's testimony, as it had a sufficient factual basis under Federal Rules of Evidence 703 and 705.
• United States v. Rans
  851 F.2d 1111· 8th Cir.· 1988-07-15
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence despite a questioned chain of custody, as there was no reasonable probability the evidence or its contents had been altered.
• City OF Valparaiso v. Niceville
  529 So. 2d 752· Fla. 1st DCA· 1988-07-14
  The City of Valparaiso appeals a trial court's denial of its motion for further relief seeking one-third of the expanded capacity of a regional sewer system operated by a board representing three municipalities. The appellate court affirms, holding that the Sewer Board had author
• Papas v. Hanlon
  849 F.2d 702· 1st Cir.· 1988-06-21
  A district court may tax costs against a litigant permitted to proceed in forma pauperis, and the exercise of this authority under Rule 54(d) is discretionary.
• United States v. Avram Gottlieb
  849 F.2d 359· 8th Cir.· 1988-06-17
  The court held that the District Court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea.
• McMATH v. Floannel Fuqua McMATH
  526 So. 2d 1027· Fla. 1st DCA· 1988-06-16
  The court affirmed a dissolution judgment on asset division and alimony but certified to the Florida Supreme Court the question of whether trial courts may require an alimony-paying spouse to maintain life insurance securing the alimony award.
• Unisys Corp. v. Dataware Prods., Inc.
  848 F.2d 311· 1st Cir.· 1988-06-06
  The court held that the district court had jurisdiction to grant preliminary relief and did not abuse its discretion in doing so, as the bankruptcy trustee had abandoned the relevant causes of action.
• Needville Cotton Warehouse, Inc. v. Interstate Commerce Comm'n & United States
  845 F.2d 550· 5th Cir.· 1988-05-20
  The court held that the ICC's dismissal of Needville's petition to reopen the rail line abandonment exemption was not an abuse of discretion, and Needville's due process rights were not violated.
• State v. McCLAIN
  525 So. 2d 420· Fla.· 1988-05-19
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld the exclusion of evidence of trace cocaine in a vehicular manslaughter defendant's blood, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion under the Evidence Code's rule balancing probative value against unfair prejudice. The Court reconc
• Wilder v. Prokop
  846 F.2d 613· 10th Cir.· 1988-05-10
  The court held that the district court had jurisdiction to review the MSPB's decision, but the MSPB's dismissal of the appeal as untimely was not arbitrary or capricious, and mandamus relief was not warranted.
• Alton Sizemore and Golie Sizemore v. RAY Gunter Trucking, Inc.
  524 So. 2d 717· Fla. 1st DCA· 1988-05-06
  The court held that dismissal for failure to comply with a discovery order is an extreme sanction that requires an evidentiary hearing to determine if the noncompliance was willful or in bad faith.
• Clementine Murray and Carmen R. Wright Ad Litem for Adrian Lavonne Wright v. Ramada Inns, Inc.
  843 F.2d 831· 5th Cir.· 1988-04-18
  The court held that assumption of the risk does not bar recovery under Louisiana's comparative negligence statute and that the jury's damage award was excessive.
• MacCUISH v. The United States
  844 F.2d 733· 10th Cir.· 1988-04-15
  The court held that a civil litigant does not have a Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel, and the admission of expert testimony was not an abuse of discretion.
• Niro Atomizer, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency
  585 F. Supp. 1109· S.D. Fla.· 1988-03-31
  The court held that the EPA's decision must be remanded because the agency deviated from its established review standards and relied on undisclosed factual bases without providing adequate notice or opportunity for rebuttal.
• Scotchel v. Scotchel
  524 So. 2d 1045· Fla. 4th DCA· 1988-03-30
  The court held that while some closing argument statements were improper, they did not amount to harmful error requiring a new trial.
• Camyna, Inc. v. Hillestad Enters., Inc.
  521 So. 2d 323· Fla. 4th DCA· 1988-03-09
  Defendants appealed a judgment on a promissory note, arguing that a security agreement should have been admitted via parol evidence to modify their liability. The court affirmed the trial court's judgment, holding that because the existence of the security agreement was not prove
• Mosley v. Mosley
  520 So. 2d 683· Fla. 1st DCA· 1988-03-01
  The appellate court affirmed the trial court's order awarding the entire insurance sum to the former wife.
• In re Fine Paper Antitrust Litigation
  840 F.2d 188· 3d Cir.· 1988-02-18
  A district court cannot reopen a final money judgment under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(6) merely because other parties in a similar situation later obtained a more favorable outcome on appeal.
• Alvarez v. Simmons Mkt. Research Bureau, Inc.
  839 F.2d 930· 2d Cir.· 1988-02-18
  The court held that dismissing the action for failure to prepare a portion of the pretrial order was an abuse of discretion.
• Likins-Foster Honolulu Corp. v. Comm'r Internal Revenue Serv.
  840 F.2d 642· 9th Cir.· 1988-02-17
  The court held that interest allocated under I.R.C. § 482 to a parent corporation for interest-free loans to its subsidiary constitutes personal holding company income, and that the retroactive application of relevant Treasury Regulations was not an abuse of discretion.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Aces Mech. Corp.
  837 F.2d 570· 2d Cir.· 1988-01-22 ·via Abuse Of Administrative Discretion
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board abused its discretion by refusing to defer to a prior arbitral decision, as the arbitral panel had considered the facts relevant to the subsequent unfair labor practice charge.
• McCULLOUGH v. Lynaugh
  835 F.2d 1126· 5th Cir.· 1988-01-20
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the case without prejudice for failure to prosecute, as the plaintiff had not suffered prejudicial harm.
• Plevy v. Plevy
  517 So. 2d 128· Fla. 4th DCA· 1987-12-30
  In a post-dissolution alimony modification case, the Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's decision to decrease the wife's alimony, holding that the substantial increase in the husband's earnings combined with the wife's continuing financial struggles
• United States v. Beebe
  835 F.2d 670· 6th Cir.· 1987-12-22
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding attorney fees to the taxpayer under the EAJA because the IRS's position was not substantially justified.
• Sloane v. Def. Logistics Agency
  834 F.2d 1006· Fed. Cir.· 1987-12-03
  The court affirmed the arbitrator's decision, finding it was not arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, unsupported by substantial evidence, or otherwise not in accordance with law.
• Baldomero Arbona Torres v. Awilda Aponte Roque
  831 F.2d 26· 1st Cir.· 1987-10-16
  The court affirmed the preliminary injunction, finding sufficient evidence that plaintiffs' political affiliation was a substantial factor in their non-reappointment and that defendants failed to prove the non-renewals would have occurred regardless of political affiliation.
• The Heritage Corp. OF S. Fla. v. Small
  514 So. 2d 393· Fla. 3d DCA· 1987-10-13
• NEW Orleans Channel 20, Inc. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n
  830 F.2d 361· D.C. Cir.· 1987-10-06
  The FCC's denial of a construction permit extension and cancellation of the permit was not arbitrary, capricious, or contrary to precedent, as the proposed assignee failed to provide specific and detailed showings of its commitment to construct the station.
• Kamar Int'l v. Russ Berrie & Co., Inc.
  829 F.2d 783· 9th Cir.· 1987-10-01
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding statutory damages exceeding the statutory maximum, as the infringement occurred after notice and the award served the purpose of deterring future infringement.
• United States v. Sanchez
  829 F.2d 757· 9th Cir.· 1987-10-01
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence obtained through the use of a Forward Looking Infrared (FLIR) device, as a sufficient foundation was laid regarding its reliability for generic identification and the operator's expertise.
• Icon Grp., Inc. v. Mahogany RUN Dev. Corp.
  829 F.2d 463-473· 3d Cir.· 1987-09-30
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in dismissing the complaint without prejudice, as the plaintiff made a reasonable, good-faith effort to comply with the court's orders regarding joinder and real party in interest.
• Hill v. McDERMOTT, Inc.
  827 F.2d 1040· 5th Cir.· 1987-09-23
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the seaman's motion for relief from judgment under Rule 60(b) because the asserted errors were not obvious mistakes of law and the motion was not filed within the time for appeal.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. The Am. Bd. OF Trade, Inc.
  829 F.2d 341· 2d Cir.· 1987-09-22
  The court held that orders invalidating a judicial sale and requiring resale are not final and appealable, and thus the initial notice of appeal did not divest the district court of jurisdiction to conduct a second auction and confirm a sale.
• Smith v. Gunsaullus
  511 So. 2d 1108· Fla. 1st DCA· 1987-09-03
  Smith appealed a foreclosure judgment, arguing the trial court erred in denying her motion to set aside the judgment based on mistake, inadvertence, surprise, and excusable neglect. The appellate court affirmed, holding that Smith's counsel failed to demonstrate excusable neglect
• Beverly Chapel Adams v. Adams
  511 So. 2d 743· Fla. 5th DCA· 1987-08-27
  In this marriage dissolution appeal, the former wife challenges the trial court's decision not to award her the husband's interest in their jointly-owned marital home. The appellate court affirms, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in making an equitable di
• United States v. Eleuteria Felix-Meza
  825 F.2d 1334· 9th Cir.· 1987-08-19
  A bail bondsman's reliance on an erroneous certificate of discharge from the clerk was unreasonable when the bondsman failed to ensure the defendant's appearance and was constructively aware of the failure.
• SOS Alford v. The Sch. Bd. OF Jackson Cnty.
  511 So. 2d 438· Fla. 1st DCA· 1987-08-18
  The Florida First District Court of Appeal affirmed the Jackson County School Board's decision to eliminate seventh and eighth grades from Alford School and transfer those students to Cottondale High School, finding no flagrant abuse of discretion.
• In re Grand Jury Proceedings. Morton Goodman v. United States
  825 F.2d 224· 9th Cir.· 1987-08-17
  Bail pending appeal of a civil contempt order must be denied if the appeal is frivolous or taken for delay.
• United States v. Levasseur
  826 F.2d 158· 1st Cir.· 1987-08-17
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in ordering the government to disclose promises, rewards, and inducements made to witnesses, despite petitioners' safety concerns.
• United States v. Jalid Jose Amer
  824 F.2d 906· 11th Cir.· 1987-08-14 ·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Severance
  The court held that a defendant is not entitled to a new jury selection after a codefendant is severed mid-trial, provided the initial denial of severance was not an abuse of discretion.
• Owsley v. Owsley
  510 So. 2d 1169· Fla. 3d DCA· 1987-08-11
  The court held that a trial court may equitably divide a bank account funded by the husband's salary bonus during marriage, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding lump sum and rehabilitative alimony.
• Brandt Bakery Supplies & Crum & Forster (U.S. Ins. Group) v. Christmas
  509 So. 2d 1347· Fla. 1st DCA· 1987-07-21
  The Florida Court of Appeal reversed a workers' compensation deputy commissioner's award of a $25,000 lump-sum advance of permanent total disability benefits, holding that the claimant failed to establish a financial plan demonstrating the advance was in his best interest and tha
• McKENZIE Constr., Inc. v. Desmond L. Maynard
  823 F.2d 43· 3d Cir.· 1987-07-07 ·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  A contingent fee agreement, reasonable when entered into, remains enforceable even if subsequent events make the fee appear high, provided the client has not proven the fee became unreasonable through changed circumstances or attorney misconduct.
• United States v. Knight Doggett
  821 F.2d 1049· 5th Cir.· 1987-07-01
  The court held that a prospective juror's statement about pretrial publicity and perceived guilt, even if heard by the seated jury, does not automatically warrant a mistrial if the judge gives proper curative instructions and assesses impartiality.
• United States v. Moore
  822 F.2d 35· 8th Cir.· 1987-06-26
  The court held that the Interstate Agreement on Detainers Act (IADA) was inapplicable and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to withdraw guilty pleas.
• Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n v. Caribe Hilton Int'l & Union De Tronquistas De P.R.
  821 F.2d 74· 1st Cir.· 1987-06-23 ·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard On Appeal
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding attorney's fees to the prevailing defendants because the EEOC's action was unreasonable and without foundation.
• Clements v. Clements
  509 So. 2d 957· Fla. 1st DCA· 1987-06-16
  In a marital dissolution case, the wife appealed the trial court's denial of alimony, attorney's fees, an allegedly inadequate child support award, and failure to recognize her special equity in her husband's construction business. The appellate court affirmed, finding no abuse o