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

• Carolann D. Kozel v. Ostendorf
  603 So. 2d 602· Fla. 2d DCA· 1992-07-24 ·cited 20×
  A trial court has discretion to dismiss a complaint with prejudice when a plaintiff fails to timely file an amended complaint after being directed to do so, and such dismissal is not an abuse of discretion when the delay is extreme and counsel offers no showing that the delay was
• Myron Durtsche, Jr. v. Am. Colloid Co.
  958 F.2d 1007· 10th Cir.· 1992-03-11 ·cited 20×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  The court held that amendments to an employee handbook attempting to reinstate at-will employment were ineffective as a matter of law because they were not conspicuous. The court also affirmed the admission of evidence regarding future damages and groundwater contamination.
• United States v. Brooks
  957 F.2d 1138· 4th Cir.· 1992-02-28 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed convictions for conspiracy to distribute cocaine, but vacated one defendant's sentence for obstruction of justice and remanded for resentencing.
• Susanne Littlefield v. McGUFFEY
  954 F.2d 1337· 7th Cir.· 1992-01-27 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the judgment, holding that the defendant's evidentiary and jury instruction challenges lacked merit, and that the award of damages and attorney's fees was supported by the evidence and applicable law.
• The Resolution Tr. Corp. v. Elman
  949 F.2d 624· 2d Cir.· 1991-11-26 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting a preliminary injunction ordering the transfer of files, as the federal statute FIRREA supersedes the attorney's retaining lien under state law at this stage.
• United States v. Bounds
  943 F.2d 541· 5th Cir.· 1991-09-20 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a district court's failure to inform a defendant of the possibility of supervised release during a guilty plea colloquy, when the aggregate maximum penalty exceeds the statutory maximum previously stated, requires reversal and vacation of the sentence, allowin
• Brown v. State
  579 So. 2d 898· Fla. 4th DCA· 1991-05-29 ·cited 20×
  A conviction for criminal contempt based on perjury must be reversed where there is no evidence that the defendant knew the truth of the statements denied on cross-examination, because intent is an essential element of perjury.
• United States v. Huddleston
  929 F.2d 1030· 5th Cir.· 1991-04-11 ·cited 20×·via Gross Abuse Of Discretion
  The court concurred that the Sentencing Commission did not adequately consider public safety risk in § 2K1.3, but noted the district court's departure from guidelines was unexplained.
• British Robinson v. State
  575 So. 2d 699· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-02-06 ·cited 20×
  British Robinson appeals his convictions for sexual battery and aggravated assault, challenging the trial court's application of Florida's Rape Shield Law to exclude evidence of the victim's reputation as a prostitute. The court affirmed the convictions, holding that while such e
• Garcia-Lopez v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  923 F.2d 72· 7th Cir.· 1991-01-23 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the Board of Immigration Appeals did not abuse its discretion in denying voluntary departure, as it rationally weighed the favorable equities against the alien's extensive history of immigration law violations.
• United States v. Brown
  921 F.2d 785· 8th Cir.· 1990-12-24 ·cited 20×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Severance
  The court held that sentencing based on the total weight of a drug mixture, including diluents, is constitutional and that evidence was sufficient to support convictions for drug possession with intent to distribute and carrying a firearm during a drug trafficking offense.
• G.J.B. & Assocs., Inc. v. Berland
  913 F.2d 824· 10th Cir.· 1990-09-05 ·cited 20×
  A sanction order against an attorney of record is not a final decision for appeal under § 1291, nor is it immediately appealable under the collateral order doctrine. However, Rule 11 sanctions were vacated for lack of due process, while Rule 16(f) sanctions were affirmed.
• United States v. Dillard
  910 F.2d 461· 7th Cir.· 1990-08-17 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in revoking supervised release, imposing a term of incarceration, or determining the length of that sentence, and that the defendant received effective assistance of counsel.
• In re Sonnax Indus., Inc. v. TRI Component Prods. Corp.
  907 F.2d 1280· 2d Cir.· 1990-06-25 ·cited 20×
  The court held that denial of a motion to lift the automatic stay in bankruptcy is a final, appealable order under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying relief.
• United States v. Elda M. Clark
  901 F.2d 855· 10th Cir.· 1990-04-19 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a district court must have an evidentiary basis to support its determination that a defendant is able to pay restitution immediately.
• Thomas E. Hoar, Inc. v. Sara LEE Corp.
  900 F.2d 522· 2d Cir.· 1990-04-02 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the appellant law firm lacked standing to challenge the district court's review standard and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing sanctions for discovery violations, finding due process was satisfied.
• Simon v. Shearson Lehman Bros., Inc.
  895 F.2d 1304· 11th Cir.· 1990-02-20 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the statement imputing authorization of a forged LOA was slander per se under California law, and while the evidence supported general and punitive damages, the amounts were excessive, requiring a new trial unless a remittitur was accepted.
• Hollander v. Am. Cyanamid Co.
  895 F.2d 80· 2d Cir.· 1990-01-30 ·cited 20×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Discovery Rulings
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by denying discovery of information regarding other terminated employees over 40, which was relevant to the plaintiff's pretext argument for discriminatory discharge. However, the court affirmed summary judgment on the
• FMC Corp. v. Varonos
  892 F.2d 1308· 7th Cir.· 1990-01-11 ·cited 20×
  The court held that Varonos's communications to FMC in Illinois, containing misrepresentations in furtherance of her fraudulent scheme, subjected her to personal jurisdiction under the Illinois long-arm statute and due process. The court also held that the district court abused i
• Rode v. Dellarciprete
  892 F.2d 1177· 3d Cir.· 1990-01-04 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed in part and reversed in part the district court's attorney fee award, remanding for further explanation on certain reductions.
• Boren v. Sable
  887 F.2d 1032· 10th Cir.· 1989-10-10 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding testimony as hearsay, as the statements involved multiple layers of hearsay and lacked a proper agency relationship for admission under Fed.R.Evid. 801(d)(2)(D).
• United States v. Johnson
  886 F.2d 1120· 9th Cir.· 1989-09-25 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to disclose the informant's identity, that defendants lacked standing to challenge certain aspects of a sentencing statute, and that a firearms conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) can be based on a co
• United States v. Harvey
  885 F.2d 181· 4th Cir.· 1989-09-13 ·cited 20×
  The court should affirm the imposition of the fine because the appellate court has no power to review a sentence within statutory limits absent clear abuse of discretion, a procedural defect, or misinformation.
• United States v. Gossett
  877 F.2d 901· 11th Cir.· 1989-07-19 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying requests for additional investigative funds, severance, continuance, or in excluding certain testimony, and that the jury instructions and evidence were sufficient.
• United States v. Blandina
  895 F.2d 293· 7th Cir.· 1989-07-12 ·cited 20×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Continuance
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the defendant's motions related to the Speedy Trial Act, continuances, and evidentiary rulings, and that sufficient evidence supported the tax evasion conviction.
• United States v. Johnson
  879 F.2d 331· 8th Cir.· 1989-07-10 ·cited 20×
  The court held that while evidence of a prior act was improperly admitted, the error was harmless due to overwhelming evidence of guilt, and the trial court did not err in applying the Sentencing Guidelines.
• Colvin W. McDONALD v. Conlee Pickens, M.D., & Hodnette Med. Ctr. Clinic, P.A.
  544 So. 2d 261· Fla. 1st DCA· 1989-05-17 ·cited 20×
  A medical malpractice case appealing a trial court's denial of a motion for new trial based on allegedly false testimony by defense expert witnesses regarding compensation. The trial court found that even if false testimony occurred, it was not material enough to warrant a new tr
• Jones v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
  870 F.2d 982· 5th Cir.· 1989-04-24 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the jury's verdict must be reversed for failure to award all damages to which Michael and Harold Jones were entitled under the clear weight of the evidence, but affirmed the trial court's enforcement of stipulated past medical expenses.
• United States v. Vance
  868 F.2d 1167· 10th Cir.· 1989-02-21 ·cited 20×
  The dissenting judge argues that restitution under 18 U.S.C. § 3651 is strictly limited to damages caused by offenses for which a conviction was had, and cannot extend to dismissed counts or offenses for which the defendant was acquitted.
• Hough v. Local 134
  867 F.2d 1018· 7th Cir.· 1989-02-01 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the denial of the motion to vacate was not an abuse of discretion because the attorney's misunderstanding of a court order did not constitute excusable neglect. The appeal from the summary judgment was untimely.
• N.A.A.C.P. (National Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People) v. City OF Mansfield
  866 F.2d 162· 6th Cir.· 1989-01-18 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction for police hiring, finding no abuse of discretion, but remanded the fire department injunction due to subsequent events casting doubt on the harm analysis.
• In re Bendectin Litigation. Sarah Ann Hoffman v. Merrell DOW Pharms., Inc.
  857 F.2d 290· 6th Cir.· 1988-08-30 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court's exclusion of certain plaintiffs from the courtroom without a hearing violated their due process rights, and that the case law establishing the requirement for such hearings should apply retroactively.
• Hatteras OF Lauderdale, Inc. v. Gemini Lady (A Vessel)
  853 F.2d 848· 11th Cir.· 1988-08-29 ·cited 20×
  The court held that contracts for the sale or construction of a vessel, including customization, are not maritime in nature and do not invoke admiralty jurisdiction. Sanctions under Rule 11 were properly imposed on counsel for filing a suit without a good faith argument for modif
• Lucien Sherrod v. Berry
  856 F.2d 802· 7th Cir.· 1988-08-22 ·cited 20×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
• Lane M. McGONIGAL v. Gearhart Indus., Inc.
  851 F.2d 774· 5th Cir.· 1988-08-11 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the government contractor defense does not apply to defective manufacture, the admission of certain evidence was harmless error, res ipsa loquitur was properly submitted, and the jury instructions were not misleading.
• Freeze v. Griffith
  849 F.2d 172· 5th Cir.· 1988-07-11 ·cited 20×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Continuance
  The court held that various officials were immune from liability under § 1983 and that the remaining claims were barred by prescription or lacked merit. The court also taxed costs against the appellant for frivolous appeals.
• Spiller v. U.S.V. Labs., Inc.
  842 F.2d 535· 1st Cir.· 1988-03-23 ·cited 20×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard On Appeal
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the case due to the plaintiff's repeated failure to comply with court orders and discovery obligations.
• Dominic v. Hess OIL V.I. Corp.
  841 F.2d 513· 3d Cir.· 1988-03-10 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in allowing the plaintiff additional time to serve process, but erred in awarding expert witness fees exceeding statutory limits.
• Molina v. State
  520 So. 2d 320· Fla. 2d DCA· 1988-02-26 ·cited 20×
  Roland Molina appeals the revocation of his probation for allegedly failing to contact enough prospective employers during a job search and failing to properly document the search. The appellate court reversed the revocation, finding the violations were neither willful nor substa
• United States v. Ascarrunz
  838 F.2d 759· 5th Cir.· 1988-02-17 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a co-conspirator's statements made after a defendant's arrest are admissible if made in furtherance of the ongoing conspiracy by an unarrested co-conspirator. The court also found sufficient evidence to support the convictions and no abuse of discretion in den
• Snow MacHines v. Hedco
  838 F.2d 718· 3d Cir.· 1988-02-09 ·cited 20×
  The court held that submitting a proposed order that is actually signed by a judge cannot be considered objectively unreasonable under Rule 11, absent extraordinary circumstances.
• Marianna Temple v. John Temple
  519 So. 2d 1054· Fla. 4th DCA· 1988-01-27 ·cited 20×
  In this dissolution of marriage appeal, the Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's equitable distribution of marital assets and lump sum alimony award, but reversed and remanded for the award of attorney's fees and costs to the wife, finding the trial court d
• DCD Programs, Ltd. v. Leighton
  833 F.2d 183· 9th Cir.· 1987-11-27 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by denying leave to amend the complaint without providing a justifying reason, as such denial is inconsistent with the spirit of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
• Hinman v. Honorable Richard D. Rogers
  831 F.2d 937· 10th Cir.· 1987-10-23 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the petitions for writ of mandamus seeking his disqualification.
• Hernandez-Patino v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  831 F.2d 750· 7th Cir.· 1987-10-06 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision denying suspension of deportation, finding no abuse of discretion in the determination of lack of extreme hardship.
• Amos Hamilton v. Neptune Orient Lines, Ltd.
  811 F.2d 498· 9th Cir.· 1987-02-25 ·cited 20×
  Dismissal for want of prosecution under Rule 41(b) was improper because the district court failed to provide clear warning and consider alternative sanctions.
• United States v. Gonzalez
  804 F.2d 691· 11th Cir.· 1986-11-19 ·cited 20×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Severance
  The court held that the defenses of the two defendants were not mutually antagonistic, and therefore, severance was not required.
• Villanueva-Franco v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  802 F.2d 327· 9th Cir.· 1986-10-10 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the Board of Immigration Appeals did not abuse its discretion in denying voluntary departure based on the petitioner's criminal record, even considering acts outside the statutory five-year period.
• Cruz-Lopez v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  802 F.2d 1518· 4th Cir.· 1986-10-10 ·cited 20×
  The dissenting judge would find the petitioner has demonstrated a well-founded fear of persecution, making him eligible for asylum.
• Jones v. Benefit Tr. Life Ins. Co.
  800 F.2d 1397· 5th Cir.· 1986-10-01 ·cited 20×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  The court held that the district court erred in granting judgment n.o.v. on emotional distress damages, and that the jury's award should be reinstated, allowing the plaintiff to amend his prayer for relief.