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

• United States v. LaCHANCE
  817 F.2d 1491· 11th Cir.· 1987-06-01 ·cited 22×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, the district court did not err in denying motions for severance, admitting evidence, or refusing hybrid representation.
• United States v. Hashagen
  816 F.2d 899· 3d Cir.· 1987-04-23 ·cited 22×
  A notice of appeal filed after a verdict but before sentencing, though premature, ripens into an appealable order when the judgment of sentence is entered, and will be treated as timely unless it causes prejudice.
• Olimpia Lazo-Majano v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  813 F.2d 1432· 9th Cir.· 1987-04-02 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the appellant suffered persecution on account of political opinion, entitling her to asylum and withholding of deportation.
• Mendez-Efrain v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  813 F.2d 279· 9th Cir.· 1987-03-25 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to establish a clear probability or well-founded fear of persecution, and thus was not eligible for asylum or withholding of deportation.
• United States v. Fermin P. Castillo
  814 F.2d 351· 7th Cir.· 1987-02-26 ·cited 22×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict of conviction for mail fraud and conspiracy, and that the trial court did not err in its evidentiary or procedural rulings.
• United States v. Musa "Moses" Sweiss
  800 F.2d 684· 7th Cir.· 1986-09-05 ·cited 22×
  The court held that while portions of the excluded tape recording were admissible under the rule of completeness, the defendant waived the issue by failing to lay a sufficient foundation at trial.
• Watson v. Fort Worth Bank & Tr.
  798 F.2d 791· 5th Cir.· 1986-08-27 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by decertifying the class, as common questions of law or fact existed between black applicants and employees, and the statistical proof presented was sufficient to infer a pattern and practice of discrimination.
• Smalley v. United States
  798 F.2d 1182· 8th Cir.· 1986-08-20 ·cited 22×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  The court held that the government did not violate Brady v. Maryland by withholding evidence that the defense already possessed, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding extrinsic evidence regarding a witness's drug use, as it was not sufficiently rel
• United States v. Brone
  792 F.2d 1504· 9th Cir.· 1986-07-02 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the affidavit for the initial wiretap was sufficient to meet the necessity requirement, but remanded for further proceedings regarding the extension and spinoff wiretaps.
• Nowell v. Universal Elec. Co.
  792 F.2d 1310· 5th Cir.· 1986-06-25 ·cited 22×
  The court held that conflicting jury instructions on negligence and damages constituted plain error, requiring a new trial despite the lack of a specific objection to the erroneous portion.
• Nemaizer v. Baker
  793 F.2d 58· 2d Cir.· 1986-06-05 ·cited 22×
  The district court did not abuse its discretion in construing a prior stipulated dismissal to allow a subsequent ERISA claim, finding a mutual misunderstanding regarding the scope of the dismissal.
• Sierra Switchboard Co. v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp.
  789 F.2d 705· 9th Cir.· 1986-05-07 ·cited 22×
  The district court should have dismissed the appeal for failure to timely designate the record and issues on appeal.
• Supermarket OF Homes, Inc. v. SAN Fernando Valley Bd. OF Realtors
  786 F.2d 1400· 9th Cir.· 1986-04-15 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court did not err in granting summary judgment for the defendant on antitrust claims and copyright infringement counterclaim, and in striking certain affirmative defenses.
• James and Joyce Ferrell v. Pierce
  785 F.2d 1372· 7th Cir.· 1986-03-21 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by holding HUD in contempt because the consent decree did not contain an unambiguous command that HUD violated, and HUD was not given a fair opportunity to litigate the change-in-policy charge.
• United States v. Eakes
  783 F.2d 499· 5th Cir.· 1986-02-19 ·cited 22×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  The court held that the trial court's continuance did not violate the Speedy Trial Act, and the circumstantial evidence was sufficient to prove the substance was cocaine. However, the judgment erroneously recited convictions for charges not in the indictment.
• Dawsey v. Olin Corp.
  782 F.2d 1254· 5th Cir.· 1986-02-18 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the judgment for Olin, holding that the jury's finding of no proximate damages was supported by substantial evidence, and that the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings.
• Gregory v. Seaboard Sys. R.R., Inc.
  484 So. 2d 35· Fla. 2d DCA· 1986-01-29 ·cited 22×
  The Gregorys appeal a trial court's order granting Seaboard System Railroad a new trial based on alleged improprieties in closing argument. The appellate court reverses, holding that the trial judge abused its discretion because most objectionable statements were either not objec
• Wis. Real Est. Inv. Tr. v. Weinstein
  781 F.2d 589· 7th Cir.· 1986-01-13 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the district court's decision regarding the calculation of compensation, the disposition of stock, and the award of attorneys' fees, finding that the equities favored the defendants.
• S.B. P'rs v. Holmes
  479 So. 2d 280· Fla. 2d DCA· 1985-12-06 ·cited 22×·via Gross Abuse Of Discretion
  S.B. Partners appeals the trial court's denial of its motion to vacate a default judgment entered after it failed to respond to a personal injury complaint. The court reversed the denial of the motion to vacate, finding excusable neglect and meritorious defenses, but affirmed the
• Miner v. Westlake
  478 So. 2d 1066· Fla.· 1985-11-25 ·cited 22×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that the state's mere convenience in trying codefendants together is not an exceptional circumstance sufficient to extend a defendant's speedy trial time over the defendant's objection. The Court clarified that a defendant's speedy trial right takes
• In re Hill v. Shekter
  775 F.2d 1385· 9th Cir.· 1985-11-12 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by dismissing the bankruptcy appeal solely for the attorney's failure to timely file a brief without considering alternative sanctions.
• Greenwood v. Dittmer
  776 F.2d 785· 8th Cir.· 1985-11-08 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the district court's grant of judgment notwithstanding the verdict on fraud claims, its denial of a new trial on the counterclaim, and its award of attorneys' fees, while reversing the directed verdict on the fiduciary duty claim.
• Olin Water Servs. v. Midland Research Labs., Inc.
  774 F.2d 303· 8th Cir.· 1985-10-02 ·cited 22×
  The appeal from the preliminary injunction is dismissed as moot because the injunctions have expired and the issues are not preserved for appeal, requiring a trial on the merits.
• Cuevas v. Reading & Bates Corp.
  770 F.2d 1371· 5th Cir.· 1985-09-19 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court's dismissal order was final and appealable, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the case on forum non conveniens grounds because U.S. law did not apply.
• In re O.P.M. Leasing Servs., Inc. v. FAR W. Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n
  769 F.2d 911· 2d Cir.· 1985-08-05 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a motion for an out-of-time appeal, as the circumstances did not constitute excusable neglect.
• Harrison v. Byrd
  765 F.2d 501· 5th Cir.· 1985-07-15 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in denying the plaintiff's Rule 60(b) motion because it overlooked a timely filed affidavit that raised a material issue of fact regarding excessive force.
• Cruz v. W.B. "Bill" Hauck
  762 F.2d 1230· 5th Cir.· 1985-06-17 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in denying supplemental attorney's fees for defending the original fee claim and complying with court orders, and that its findings were insufficient to deny the motion as untimely.
• United States v. Smith Grading & Paving, Inc.
  760 F.2d 527· 4th Cir.· 1985-04-22 ·cited 22×
  The court held that extrinsic evidence of prior bad acts, offered for a purpose other than proving character and more probative than prejudicial, is admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) even if it could also be excluded under Federal Rule of Evidence 608(b).
• Sanchez v. United States Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  755 F.2d 1158· 5th Cir.· 1985-03-25 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the Board of Immigration Appeals did not abuse its discretion in ordering the petitioner deported, as the Board gave adequate consideration to the relevant hardship factors.
• Hagmeyer v. Dep't OF the Treas.
  757 F.2d 1281· Fed. Cir.· 1985-03-20 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the removal penalty was an abuse of discretion based on a single, less egregious charge after others were dropped, and that the appellant failed to prove his removal was a reprisal for whistleblowing due to lack of agency knowledge.
• In re DeLOREAN Motor Co. v. John Z. DeLOREAN (83-1802)
  755 F.2d 1223· 6th Cir.· 1985-02-27 ·cited 22×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Preliminary Injunctions
  The court held that a bankruptcy court's order to escrow sale proceeds, intended to preserve assets for investigation, was a valid preliminary injunction under 11 U.S.C. § 105(a) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 65, not an attachment governed by state law.
• John v. DeWITT
  747 F.2d 1442· Fed. Cir.· 1984-11-09 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the Merit Systems Protection Board's decision to sustain the removal of an employee for unauthorized possession of government property was supported by substantial evidence and that the penalty was not an abuse of discretion.
• Eduard Falk and Lettye M. Falk v. Sun Cha Allen
  739 F.2d 461· 9th Cir.· 1984-08-02 ·cited 22×
  A tenant is entitled to relief from a default judgment for unlawful detainer when the landlord repeatedly accepted late rent, failed to provide proper notice for a subsequent delinquency, and the tenant has a meritorious defense and did not act culpably.
• S. Hampton Co. v. Stinnes Corp.
  733 F.2d 1108· 5th Cir.· 1984-05-23 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the refiner breached the contract by failing to construct the terminal as agreed and that there was sufficient evidence of fraud to warrant a jury trial on the buyers' counterclaim. The court also affirmed the indemnity claim but rejected the deceptive practic
• United States v. McCOLLUM
  732 F.2d 1419· 9th Cir.· 1984-05-08 ·cited 22×
  The dissenting judge argues that the trial court erred in admitting a prior conviction under Rule 609 and that this error was not harmless, as the majority found.
• United States v. Terry
  729 F.2d 1063· 6th Cir.· 1984-03-16 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting tape-recorded conversations and evidence of prior misconduct, and that the defendants' other alleged trial errors did not warrant reversal.
• Brewer v. Jeep Corp.
  724 F.2d 653· 8th Cir.· 1983-12-30 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the failure to instruct the jury on breach of warranty was harmless error, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to admit a film without its accompanying report.
• In re The Knoxville News-Sentinel Co., Inc.
  723 F.2d 470· 6th Cir.· 1983-12-13 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in removing sensitive financial exhibits from the court file to protect borrower privacy, and that the newspapers' claims regarding the initial sealing order were moot due to subsequent public access.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Valley Plaza, Inc.
  715 F.2d 237· 6th Cir.· 1983-08-12 ·cited 22×
  The court enforced the National Labor Relations Board's order, finding substantial evidence supported the Board's conclusions that the company engaged in unfair labor practices and that a bargaining order was an appropriate remedy.
• United States v. Luce
  713 F.2d 1236· 6th Cir.· 1983-08-09 ·cited 22×
  A preliminary ruling on the admissibility of a prior conviction for impeachment purposes is not reviewable on appeal if the defendant does not testify at trial.
• United States v. Bovain
  708 F.2d 606· 11th Cir.· 1983-06-27 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying motions for severance and admitting evidence of prior convictions for impeachment purposes.
• United States v. Hamilton
  708 F.2d 1412· 9th Cir.· 1983-06-21 ·cited 22×
  The dissenting judge believes the district court did not abuse its discretion in revoking probation, as the violations were serious and continuing.
• Chrysler Credit Corp. v. MacIno
  710 F.2d 363· 7th Cir.· 1983-06-17 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting default judgment or denying motions to vacate, as the defendants failed to show good cause or excusable neglect.
• Allied Gen., Inc. v. Helliwell
  429 So. 2d 1287· Fla. 3d DCA· 1983-04-05 ·cited 22×
• KCST-TV, Inc. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & United States
  699 F.2d 1185· D.C. Cir.· 1983-01-25 ·cited 22×
  The dissenting judge argues that the Commission's action was not arbitrary or capricious, and that the majority's demand for a more precise rule is unwarranted.
• Montgomery Ward & Co. v. Fed. Trade Comm'n
  691 F.2d 1322· 9th Cir.· 1982-11-09 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the Commission abused its discretion by requiring signs in each department, as this was not supported by the rule's language, but affirmed the Commission's interpretation of 'ready access' requiring one set of binders per sales floor for large stores.
• Gov't of the Virgin Islands v. Joseph
  685 F.2d 857· 3d Cir.· 1982-07-23 ·cited 22×
  The majority holds that the jury's receipt of the defendant's written statement, along with the improper submission of another letter, constitutes reversible error mandating a new trial.
• Lyles v. Commercial Lovelace Motor Freight, Inc.
  684 F.2d 501· 7th Cir.· 1982-07-19 ·cited 22×
• United States v. Black
  684 F.2d 481· 7th Cir.· 1982-07-15 ·cited 22×
  The court held that a federal prosecutor's unexplained refusal to stipulate to pretrial polygraph tests does not require exclusion of exculpatory polygraph evidence, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding such evidence.
• United States v. Ricardo "Ricky" Vela
  673 F.2d 86· 5th Cir.· 1982-04-02 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the prosecution's notice-of-alibi filing was not an abuse of Rule 12.1, and telephone records were properly admitted under the business records exception.