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

• Jay Cunningham t/n Milford Pinckney v. State
  677 So. 2d 929· Fla. 4th DCA· 1996-07-17 ·cited 17×
  Defendant Cunningham appealed the trial court's denial of his motion to vacate his guilty plea to second-degree murder and robbery charges prior to sentencing, claiming ineffective assistance of counsel. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the denial, distinguishing the
• Perry & Co. & Equity Premium Fin. Co. v. First Sec. Ins. Underwriters, Inc.
  654 So. 2d 671· Fla. 3d DCA· 1995-05-17 ·cited 17×
• Holmes v. Greene
  649 So. 2d 302· Fla. 1st DCA· 1995-01-23 ·cited 17×
  A former wife appeals a trial court order modifying a custody arrangement by transferring primary physical residence of the parties' twin daughters from her to the former husband. The appellate court reversed, holding that the evidence did not support a finding of substantial or
• Levine v. DEL Am. Props., Inc.
  642 So. 2d 32· Fla. 5th DCA· 1994-08-12 ·cited 17×
  Dennis Levine appeals a default judgment entered against him for $1.1 million in a fraud and breach of contract case. The court affirmed the dismissal and entry of default based on Levine's willful failure to comply with discovery orders, but reversed the damages award because Le
• Gray v. State
  640 So. 2d 186· Fla. 1st DCA· 1994-08-01 ·cited 17×
  Scott Thomas Gray, a schoolteacher convicted of sexual battery and lewd conduct against three young students, appeals his conviction and sentence. The First District Court of Appeal reverses and remands for a new trial based on the trial court's erroneous denial of Gray's motion
• Castillo-Villagra v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  972 F.2d 1017· 9th Cir.· 1992-07-27 ·cited 17×
  The Board of Immigration Appeals improperly took administrative notice of the Nicaraguan election results without providing petitioners notice or an opportunity to be heard on the matter.
• United States v. Nickens
  955 F.2d 112· 1st Cir.· 1992-01-29 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a new trial based on juror English proficiency claims raised post-verdict, and that the prosecutor's rebuttal arguments, while improper, did not constitute plain error given the context of defense coun
• United States v. Int'l Bhd. OF Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers OF Am., AFL-CIO
  948 F.2d 1338· 2d Cir.· 1991-11-08 ·cited 17×
  The court vacated the sanctions order and remanded because the district court failed to conduct separate analyses for sanctions under Rule 11 and 28 U.S.C. § 1927, and improperly applied Rule 11 to parties who did not sign the offending documents.
• Corder v. Gates
  947 F.2d 374· 9th Cir.· 1991-10-16 ·cited 17×
  A district court may not reduce an attorney's fee award simply because the plaintiff did not prevail against all named defendants when the claims are related and the plaintiff achieved substantial relief.
• United States v. Welch
  945 F.2d 1378· 7th Cir.· 1991-10-15 ·cited 17×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Expert Testimony
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding the defendant's proffered expert testimony regarding tape alteration and in admitting the government's authenticated tape recording, and that sentencing enhancements were pro
• Def. Indus. v. Nw. Mut. Life Ins. Co.
  938 F.2d 502· 4th Cir.· 1991-07-09 ·cited 17×
  The Seventh Amendment guarantees a jury determination of the amount of punitive damages, and a district court cannot reduce such an award via judgment notwithstanding the verdict. However, a district court's conditional grant of a new trial on the amount of punitive damages may b
• Lockman Found. v. Evangelical Alliance Mission
  930 F.2d 764· 9th Cir.· 1991-04-18 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the case on forum non conveniens grounds because Japan is an adequate alternative forum and the balance of private and public interests favors dismissal. The court also held that denying leave to am
• United States v. D.G. Seago, Jr.
  930 F.2d 482· 6th Cir.· 1991-04-12 ·cited 17×
  The court held that a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, based on facts known to the defendant at the time of trial, does not constitute newly discovered evidence for the purpose of a motion for a new trial under Rule 33.
• United States v. Francesco Gambino
  926 F.2d 1355· 3d Cir.· 1991-03-04 ·cited 17×
  The court held that admitting co-conspirator hearsay statements subject to later connection is within the trial court's discretion, and that references to co-conspirators' guilty pleas are permissible to dampen credibility attacks and are not plain error when the jury is properly
• The Univ. OF Md. AT Baltimore v. Peat Marwick Main & Co.
  923 F.2d 265· 3d Cir.· 1991-01-11 ·cited 17×
  The concurring judge would affirm the district court's decision based on alternative grounds, finding the plaintiffs in the federal and state actions were not identical and had alleged direct injury.
• Myers v. Griffin-Alexander Drilling Co.
  910 F.2d 1252· 5th Cir.· 1990-09-07 ·cited 17×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Expert Testimony
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting expert testimony, that sufficient evidence supported the jury's liability verdict, and that the defendant was not entitled to an offset for a prior settlement. However, a portion of the damages awarded
• Jairo Jonathan Elias Zacarias v. U.S. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  921 F.2d 844· 9th Cir.· 1990-07-23 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the petitioner established eligibility for asylum based on a reasonable fear of forced recruitment by guerrillas, but the new evidence did not establish a prima facie case for withholding of deportation.
• United States v. Shearn Moody, Jr.
  903 F.2d 321· 5th Cir.· 1990-05-30 ·cited 17×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  The court held that the trial court erred by prohibiting the impeachment of hearsay declarants and by denying the defendant an opportunity for surrebuttal testimony, requiring reversal and remand.
• Mercedes Lighting & Elec. Supply, Inc. v. State
  560 So. 2d 272· Fla. 1st DCA· 1990-04-16 ·cited 17×
  Mercedes Lighting appeals an award of attorney's fees imposed by a hearing officer who found Mercedes' bid protest frivolous. The court reverses, holding that Mercedes had a reasonably clear legal justification for the protest and that section 120.57(1)(b)5 targets improper purpo
• Eugene McMAHON & Julia A. McMahon v. Shearson/American Express, Inc.
  896 F.2d 17· 2d Cir.· 1990-02-14 ·cited 17×
  The court held that sanctions imposed on an attorney under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 and 28 U.S.C. § 1927 were an abuse of discretion, as the attorney's actions were objectively reasonable and not taken in bad faith.
• Terra Nova Ins. Co., Ltd. v. 900 BAR
  887 F.2d 1213· 3d Cir.· 1989-10-18 ·cited 17×
  The majority erred in holding the stay order is an appealable final order regarding the duty to defend.
• Pitts v. Freeman
  887 F.2d 1438· 11th Cir.· 1989-10-11 ·cited 17×
  A school system must affirmatively take steps to achieve and maintain desegregated student populations until it achieves unitary status, and demographic shifts do not excuse this duty. The court affirmed the district court's 15% variance for faculty assignment under Singleton but
• United States v. McNEILL
  887 F.2d 448· 3d Cir.· 1989-10-11 ·cited 17×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  The court held that there was sufficient circumstantial evidence to support the conviction for solicitation and that the sentencing enhancements were properly applied.
• Instant AIR Freight Co. v. C.F. AIR Freight, Inc.
  882 F.2d 797· 3d Cir.· 1989-08-17 ·cited 17×
  The dissenting judge believes the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding irreparable harm and that injunctive relief was warranted.
• United States v. Williams
  875 F.2d 846· 11th Cir.· 1989-06-14 ·cited 17×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  The court held that the government is not required to characterize diverted corporate funds (e.g., as dividends) to prove a tax deficiency for conviction under 26 U.S.C.A. §§ 7201 or 7203; it must only prove the diversion and the taxpayer's willful intent. The court also affirmed
• Avi Nakash v. Georges Marciano
  882 F.2d 1411· 9th Cir.· 1989-06-06 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in staying federal proceedings under the Colorado River doctrine, and that the Anti-Injunction Act did not require an injunction against state proceedings due to a prior California appellate court ruling on precl
• Hardy v. Chemetron Corp.
  870 F.2d 1007· 5th Cir.· 1989-04-25 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the exclusion of evidence of subsequent remedial measures offered for impeachment purposes was reversible error.
• Stevens v. GAY
  864 F.2d 113· 11th Cir.· 1989-01-23 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the Eleventh Amendment bars suits against state agencies, and a plaintiff cannot recover attorney's fees under § 1988 if the state entity cannot be held liable on the merits.
• Wilfredo Navarro v. Rina Cohan
  856 F.2d 141· 11th Cir.· 1988-09-28 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the complaint for failure to prosecute and attend a deposition after lesser sanctions had failed.
• Cardinal v. Wendy's OF S. Fla., Inc.
  529 So. 2d 335· Fla. 4th DCA· 1988-08-03 ·cited 17×
  Appellants Cardinal challenged two post-trial orders: denial of a motion to recuse the trial judge and granting of defendant Wendy's motion for new trial. The Fourth District Court of Appeal denied the recusal petition and affirmed the new trial order, holding that the recusal mo
• The City OF Brunswick v. United States
  849 F.2d 501· 11th Cir.· 1988-07-11 ·cited 17×
  The City of Brunswick's net worth exceeded the statutory limit for EAJA eligibility, and the government's position was substantially justified, thus precluding an award of attorney fees.
• United States v. Strayer
  846 F.2d 1262· 10th Cir.· 1988-05-19 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to dismiss the indictment and that the defendant's challenge to the presentence report was moot because the court stated it would not consider the disputed information.
• Keith v. Volpe
  833 F.2d 850· 9th Cir.· 1987-12-03 ·cited 17×
  The court held that routine, day-to-day monitoring by a plaintiff's counsel can constitute duplication of effort, even when a separate monitoring entity exists.
• Rehavam Adiel and Rivka Rosenbaum v. Elec. Fin. Sys., Inc.
  513 So. 2d 1347· Fla. 3d DCA· 1987-10-13 ·cited 17×
  The court affirmed the trial court's disqualification of two shareholders as representative plaintiffs in a derivative action, finding that one plaintiff's self-interested motivations to engineer a merger involving his own corporation rendered him unfit to represent the sharehold
• Hansen v. Comm'r OF Internal Revenue Serv.
  820 F.2d 1464· 9th Cir.· 1987-06-30 ·cited 17×
  The court affirmed the Tax Court's decision, upholding the Commissioner's disallowance of the charitable deduction, assessment of deficiency and additions to tax, and imposition of damages for a frivolous claim.
• Townsel v. Cnty. OF Contra Costa
  820 F.2d 319· 9th Cir.· 1987-06-22 ·cited 17×
  The court held that a plaintiff's attorney's ignorance of Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(j) does not constitute good cause for failing to serve the summons and complaint within the prescribed 120-day period.
• United States v. Kinley Abner Goode
  814 F.2d 1353· 9th Cir.· 1987-04-13 ·cited 17×
  The court held that ordering opening statements before voir dire does not deprive a defendant of a fair trial or due process, and that sufficient evidence supported the conviction.
• Parker Towing Co. & Gen. Transp., Inc. v. Yazoo River Towing, Inc.
  794 F.2d 591· 11th Cir.· 1986-07-21 ·cited 17×
  The court affirmed the district court's findings on negligence, fault apportionment, and prejudgment interest, but remanded for reconsideration of the loss of use damages claim.
• Est. OF John Marvin Blas v. Paul Winkler, M.D.
  792 F.2d 858· 9th Cir.· 1986-06-19 ·cited 17×
  The court held that a motion to reconsider, raising legitimate legal arguments and lacking bad faith, does not constitute an unreasonable and vexatious multiplication of proceedings warranting sanctions under 28 U.S.C. § 1927.
• VISA Int'l Serv. Ass'n v. Bankcard Holders OF Am.
  784 F.2d 1472· 9th Cir.· 1986-03-21 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the district judge properly denied VISA's discovery request because even if public confusion were shown, it would not outweigh competing interests in contract enforcement, and the agreement was not cast in terms of precluding confusion.
• W. Med. Enters., Inc. v. Heckler
  783 F.2d 1376· 9th Cir.· 1986-03-03 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the Provider Reimbursement Review Board's decision on good cause for an extension is reviewable, but the Board did not abuse its discretion in denying Western's request.
• United States v. Brown
  770 F.2d 768· 9th Cir.· 1985-09-03 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying requests for psychiatric examinations, admitting evidence under Rule 404(b), admitting passports under Rule 803(24), or denying motions for severance. The court also found that the indictment sufficien
• Park A. Dallis v. AETNA Life Ins. Co.
  768 F.2d 1303· 11th Cir.· 1985-08-16 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying a directed verdict, admitting anecdotal and lay opinion testimony, or admitting evidence of a prior similar payment.
• United States v. Dikran Berberian
  767 F.2d 1324· 9th Cir.· 1985-08-06 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the district court erred in quashing the subpoena solely on the grounds that no formal immunity request was made, as the issue of immunity scope was not properly addressed below.
• Albrecht v. Heckler
  765 F.2d 914· 9th Cir.· 1985-07-11 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying attorneys' fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act because the government's position was substantially justified.
• Kalgaard v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  764 F.2d 1322· 9th Cir.· 1985-07-02 ·cited 17×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  The Tax Court's disallowance of claimed charitable contributions and imposition of additions to tax were not clearly erroneous, and sanctions were warranted for a frivolous appeal.
• United States v. Huebner
  752 F.2d 1235· 7th Cir.· 1985-01-11 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the Huebners were in civil contempt for violating a consent decree regarding Clean Water Act compliance, but reversed the order to destroy a cranberry bed expansion as an abuse of discretion.
• Flynn v. Shultz
  748 F.2d 1186· 7th Cir.· 1984-11-30 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' claims under the Hostage Act and for authorization of consular testimony were nonjusticiable political questions, as they required judicial interference with executive discretion in foreign affairs and lacked judicially manageable standards.
• Hirst v. Hirst
  452 So. 2d 1083· Fla. 4th DCA· 1984-07-11 ·cited 17×
  The trial court erred in awarding rehabilitative alimony for 17 years when the wife qualified for permanent periodic alimony under the Canakaris factors, and erred in awarding exclusive possession of the marital home for three years after the child reached majority absent a speci
• Wood v. Fortune Ins. Co.
  453 So. 2d 451· Fla. 4th DCA· 1984-07-11 ·cited 17×
  An insured appealed an order vacating a summary judgment previously entered in her favor against her insurer, arguing that the insurer's late response to requests for admissions without a motion for leave should be fatal. The court affirmed, holding that the trial judge did not a