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

• O'Neal v. Riceland Foods
  684 F.2d 577· 8th Cir.· 1982-07-29 ·cited 18×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Discovery Rulings
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case of discriminatory firing and that the employer articulated a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for her termination. The court also affirmed the grant of partial summary judgment on the discriminatory hiri
• Dewease L. Woodburn v. Woodburn
  416 So. 2d 875· Fla. 5th DCA· 1982-07-14 ·cited 18×
  The court affirmed the trial court's non-final award of temporary support, finding no abuse of discretion based on the limited record.
• Rayburn C. Hill v. Nelson
  676 F.2d 1371· 11th Cir.· 1982-05-24 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not err in reducing the judgment by the stipulated amount of nonrecoverable economic loss, nor in excluding certain evidence, nor in finding the jury verdict not legally insufficient.
• Adler v. Adler
  418 So. 2d 1007· Fla. 3d DCA· 1982-03-02 ·cited 18×
  In this divorce appeal, Leonard Adler challenges the trial court's final judgment, including an award of $40,000 in attorney's fees to his ex-wife's estate and the division of jointly owned property. The court affirmed the judgment with a minor modification to correct a calculati
• United States v. Wilson
  665 F.2d 825· 8th Cir.· 1981-12-04 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support Wilson's convictions for murder and conspiracy, but affirmed Scott's convictions.
• Olen Lirette v. Popich Bros. Water Transp. Inc.
  660 F.2d 142· 5th Cir.· 1981-10-30 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding the testimony of a witness not listed in the pre-trial order and in denying motions to reopen the evidence.
• Tommaney v. Willa Brown Tommaney
  405 So. 2d 454· Fla. 2d DCA· 1981-10-16 ·cited 18×
  This appeal from a dissolution judgment involves whether a wife was entitled to a special equity in her husband's one-half interest in the marital home based on her extraordinary contributions to the marriage. The court affirmed the trial court's award, finding that the wife's co
• Herman Bros., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  658 F.2d 201· 3d Cir.· 1981-09-03 ·cited 18×
  The court agrees that the Board did not abuse its discretion in refusing to defer to the second arbitration proceeding and that substantial evidence supports the Board's conclusion of a violation.
• Ellwest Stereo Theatre, Inc. v. Maynard Jackson
  653 F.2d 954· 5th Cir.· 1981-08-17 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in denying attorneys' fees to prevailing parties under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 based on the cited 'special circumstances'.
• Square Constr. Co. & La Fera Contracting Co. v. Wash. Metro. Area Transit Auth.
  657 F.2d 68· 4th Cir.· 1981-08-17 ·cited 18×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard On Appeal
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in denying the motion to vacate the judgment, as the withholding of the Bechtel estimate constituted misconduct that prevented a fair presentation of the defense.
• Fed. Trade Comm'n v. JIM Walter Corp.
  651 F.2d 251· 5th Cir.· 1981-07-06 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court properly exercised jurisdiction over Jim Walter Corporation and that the modified subpoena was not unreasonably burdensome.
• United States v. Barletta
  652 F.2d 218· 1st Cir.· 1981-06-29 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding the tape recording due to undue prejudice outweighing its probative value.
• Petrol Stops Northwest v. Cont'l OIL Co. & Douglas Oil Co. of Cal.
  647 F.2d 1005· 9th Cir.· 1981-06-12 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting disclosure of grand jury materials and denying intervention as untimely. The court also vacated a subsequent modification of the disclosure order.
• Patrick v. Patrick
  399 So. 2d 72· Fla. 5th DCA· 1981-05-27 ·cited 18×
  In a dissolution of marriage case, the former wife appealed a rehabilitative alimony award, and the former husband cross-appealed regarding property division. The appellate court reversed the alimony designation from rehabilitative to permanent, finding the wife had no capacity f
• Veazey v. Young's Yacht Sale & Serv., Inc.
  644 F.2d 475· 5th Cir.· 1981-05-04 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the complaint with prejudice for failure to prosecute, as there was a clear record of delay justifying this extreme sanction.
• Jorstad v. IDS Realty Tr.
  643 F.2d 1305· 8th Cir.· 1981-03-10 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by awarding excessive attorneys' fees and expenses, particularly in its calculation of the base fee and its multipliers for risk and quality.
• Estes v. Ky. Utils. Co.
  636 F.2d 1131· 6th Cir.· 1980-12-09 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in allowing the defendant to amend its answer to assert the affirmative defense of workers' compensation exclusivity, even after a significant delay.
• King v. State
  387 So. 2d 463· Fla. 1st DCA· 1980-08-18 ·cited 18×
  King pleaded no contest to second-degree murder charges after the trial court found him mentally competent to stand trial despite conflicting expert testimony. The appellate court affirmed the competency determination, holding that because King had not been formally adjudicated i
• Rivera v. White
  386 So. 2d 1233· Fla. 3d DCA· 1980-07-15 ·cited 18×
  Trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting a new trial where the jury verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence, even though supported by substantial competent evidence, because the evidence established the defendant ran a red light and was negligent.
• United States v. Barnes
  622 F.2d 107· 5th Cir.· 1980-06-19 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting a prior conviction for impeachment and in excluding certain impeachment evidence regarding a witness's prior inconsistent statements.
• Action Fire Safety Equip., Inc. v. Biscayne Fire Equip. Co., Inc.
  383 So. 2d 969· Fla. 3d DCA· 1980-05-27 ·cited 18×
  Biscayne Fire Equipment sued former general manager Frank Falsetti and his company Action Fire Safety Equipment to enforce a non-compete agreement. The trial court entered judgment for Biscayne based on a jury verdict, but the appellate court reversed and remanded regarding the t
• Bank OF Lincolnwood v. Fed. Leasing, Inc.
  622 F.2d 944· 7th Cir.· 1980-05-22 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by entering a Rule 54(b) certification sua sponte without adequately considering the relationship between adjudicated and unadjudicated claims and the financial prejudice to the defendant.
• Henry Church v. Strickland
  382 So. 2d 419· Fla. 5th DCA· 1980-04-09 ·cited 18×·via Gross Abuse Of Discretion
  This interlocutory appeal addresses whether a trial court properly set aside a partial summary judgment based on excusable neglect by substitute counsel who failed to discover admissions in the defendant's answer. The court affirmed the trial court's discretionary decision to vac
• Dart Indus. Co., Inc. v. Westwood Chem. Co., Inc.
  649 F.2d 646· 9th Cir.· 1980-04-02 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in quashing a subpoena duces tecum and denying discovery because the parties' general release agreement unambiguously barred Westwood from seeking discovery against Dart.
• Gwenn Gamse v. Touby
  382 So. 2d 115· Fla. 3d DCA· 1980-04-01 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding guardian and attorney fees, as the record contained competent substantial evidence to support the awards.
• Nanak Singh v. Marika Tolz
  380 So. 2d 1326· Fla. 4th DCA· 1980-03-19 ·cited 18×
  The appellate court affirmed the trial court's denial of the motion to alter judgment, finding no abuse of discretion.
• Schmidt v. Herrmann
  614 F.2d 1221· 9th Cir.· 1980-02-04 ·cited 18×
  The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the appellants' second amended complaint with prejudice for failure to comply with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and court orders.
• United States v. Conzemius
  611 F.2d 695· 8th Cir.· 1979-12-06 ·cited 18×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For New Trial Motions
  The court held that the newly discovered evidence did not warrant a new trial and that the sentence could not be vacated based on alleged perjury without proof of prosecutorial knowledge.
• In re Equity Funding Corp. OF Am. Sec. Litig. Chem. Bank v. Confino
  603 F.2d 1353· 9th Cir.· 1979-09-12 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not err in approving a plan of allocation that offset claimants' recovery in a securities settlement by the value of cash and stock received in a related bankruptcy reorganization proceeding.
• United States v. Williams
  605 F.2d 495· 10th Cir.· 1979-07-17 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial judge did not commit prejudicial error or abuse his discretion in admitting identification testimony, rebuttal testimony, or in denying a new trial based on alleged sequestration violations.
• Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n v. Safeway Stores
  597 F.2d 251· 10th Cir.· 1979-05-04 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in reducing the attorney's fee award, as the amount awarded was within the court's sound discretion.
• In re Boston & Me. Corp.
  596 F.2d 2· 1st Cir.· 1979-04-05 ·cited 18×
  The New Hampshire Public Utilities Commission lacked jurisdiction to prevent the railroad trustees from dismantling tracks on abandoned lines, as federal law preempts state authority over such matters. The reorganization court properly adjudicated title to the track materials as
• O'Brien v. Putnam
  591 F.2d 53· 9th Cir.· 1979-01-31 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the Parole Commission did not abuse its discretion by considering the severity of the offense and by setting the parole hearing at the one-third point of the sentence, as its regulations allowed for such actions.
• United States v. Sims
  588 F.2d 1145· 6th Cir.· 1978-12-12 ·cited 18×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the trial court properly admitted evidence of the defendant's prior convictions under Rule 609(b).
• Margoles v. Alida Johns & The Journal Co.
  587 F.2d 885· 7th Cir.· 1978-12-05 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the action for willful failure to comply with discovery orders, even when the failure was by the plaintiff's son acting as his alter ego.
• Rodriguez v. S. Pac. Transp. Co.
  587 F.2d 980· 9th Cir.· 1978-11-09 ·cited 18×
  The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to review the dismissal order because the notice of appeal was untimely filed, and affirmed the denial of the motion to set aside the judgment.
• Terino Bros., Inc. v. Airey
  364 So. 2d 768· Fla. 2d DCA· 1978-10-13 ·cited 18×
  Terino Bros. sued Arthur Airey for breach of contract regarding repair of a trenchtrailer. The trial court set aside a default judgment against Airey after determining that his pro se letter responding to the complaint constituted a timely answer. The appellate court affirmed, ho
• Cassat Ave. Mobile Homes, Inc. v. August L. Bobenhausen
  363 So. 2d 1065· Fla.· 1978-06-08 ·cited 18×
  The Florida Supreme Court discharged a writ of certiorari in a slander case, holding that while a trial judge has broad discretion to grant remittitur based on excessiveness or jury passion, the order of remittitur here was deficient because it failed to affirmatively show the im
• Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n v. Packard Elec. Div.
  569 F.2d 315· 5th Cir.· 1978-03-10 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court's denial of plant-wide statistical data was not clearly erroneous, as the EEOC failed to demonstrate its relevance at that stage of the investigation. The denial of the EEO-1 report was also affirmed as an appropriate exercise of discretion.
• Alliance TO END Repression v. Rochford
  565 F.2d 975· 7th Cir.· 1977-11-22 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in certifying the classes because the class definitions were sufficiently definite and common questions of law or fact existed.
• Monroe Cnty. Conservation Council, Inc. v. Brock Adams
  566 F.2d 419· 2d Cir.· 1977-11-22 ·cited 18×·via Arbitrary, Capricious, Or Abuse Of Discretion Standard
  The court held that the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and Section 4(f) Statement adequately considered alternatives and social impacts, and the district court did not err in finding compliance with statutory requirements.
• Richardson v. McCLUNG
  559 F.2d 395· 5th Cir.· 1977-09-19 ·cited 18×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in its evidentiary rulings or jury instructions.
• Udell Lambert Davidson v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  558 F.2d 1361· 9th Cir.· 1977-08-11 ·cited 18×
  The court held that economic disadvantage alone does not constitute extreme hardship for suspension of deportation.
• United States v. Walsh
  544 F.2d 156· 4th Cir.· 1976-10-21 ·cited 18×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Severance
  The court held that 18 U.S.C. § 224 applies to conspiracies involving sports contest participants, not just outsiders, and that the evidence was sufficient to support convictions for conspiracy to commit bribery and defraud the IRS.
• In re Bast v. United States
  542 F.2d 893· 4th Cir.· 1976-08-04 ·cited 18×
  A witness is not automatically entitled to a transcript of their grand jury testimony and must demonstrate a particularized need that outweighs the policy of grand jury secrecy.
• Midwest Coast Transp., Inc. v. Interstate Commerce Comm'n & United States
  536 F.2d 256· 8th Cir.· 1976-06-07 ·cited 18×
  The court affirmed the Interstate Commerce Commission's order granting expanded operating authority, finding that the Commission's decision was supported by substantial evidence and was not arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion.
• Hornreich v. Plant Indus., Inc.
  535 F.2d 550· 9th Cir.· 1976-05-21 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding that the appellant could not fairly and adequately represent other shareholders.
• Chicago Stadium Corp. v. Scallen
  530 F.2d 204· 8th Cir.· 1976-02-10 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in granting a preliminary injunction because the plaintiffs demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits and irreparable harm.
• Bagamasbad v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  531 F.2d 111· 3d Cir.· 1976-01-16 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the Attorney General's denial of discretionary relief for adjustment of status, based on material misrepresentations, was within his statutory authority and not subject to broader judicial review.
• United States v. Harris
  534 F.2d 207· 10th Cir.· 1975-12-03 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the supplemented record was sufficient to determine the admissibility and prejudicial effect of Exhibit 71, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the exhibit.