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

• Kaster v. Modification Sys., Inc.
  731 F.2d 1014· 2d Cir.· 1984-03-27 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the futility exception to the demand rule under F.R.Civ.P. 23.1 should apply, and the further amended complaint should be reinstated, given the allegations of complete corporate domination by one shareholder.
• CTS Corp. v. Piher Int'l Corp. & Piher Sociedad Anonima
  727 F.2d 1550· Fed. Cir.· 1984-02-17 ·cited 17×
  The court held that a causal relationship must exist between settlement agreements and the termination of a patent interference for the agreements to be subject to the filing requirement under 35 U.S.C. § 135(c).
• United States v. Wyman
  724 F.2d 684· 8th Cir.· 1984-01-10 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's request to subpoena witnesses at government expense, nor was it error to tax costs of prosecution against a defendant convicted under 26 U.S.C. § 7203, even if proceeding in forma pauperis
• Jewel King v. McCORD
  707 F.2d 466· 11th Cir.· 1983-06-13 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in recalculating attorney's fees, properly excluding time spent on unsuccessful claims and considering the relationship of the fee to the amount of recovery.
• Lilia Ann Norton and Constance Cummings v. Tallahassee Mem'l Hosp.
  700 F.2d 617· 11th Cir.· 1983-02-25 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the standard of review for attorney disqualification orders depends on the nature of the decision, with factual findings reviewed for clear error and legal conclusions reviewed traditionally, unless the decision is based on conduct observed during trial, which
• DELTA AIR Lines, Inc. v. Colbert
  692 F.2d 489· 7th Cir.· 1982-11-05 ·cited 17×
  The court held that a prevailing party in a Title VII suit is presumptively entitled to costs under Rule 54(d), and a plaintiff's colorable claims are insufficient grounds to deny costs.
• Miles Tefft v. Seward
  689 F.2d 637· 6th Cir.· 1982-10-01 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the trial judge abused discretion by denying the plaintiff's request to amend his complaint to assert a constitutional tort, and that the case should be tried on its merits.
• Suzuki v. Yuen
  678 F.2d 761· 9th Cir.· 1982-05-05 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in reducing hourly rates and the number of hours for attorneys' fees, and awarded a higher amount.
• Mil. Park Fire Control TAX Dist. NO. 4 v. DeMAROIS
  411 So. 2d 944· Fla. 4th DCA· 1982-03-24 ·cited 17×
• In the Interest of J. S. v. Seekell
  404 So. 2d 1144· Fla. 5th DCA· 1981-10-21 ·cited 17×
  The denial of a grandmother's motion to intervene in dependency proceedings was not a departure from the essential requirements of law, as she lacked standing.
• Am. Lease Plans, Inc. v. Silver Sand Co. OF Leesburg, Inc.
  637 F.2d 311· 5th Cir.· 1981-02-17 ·cited 17×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Continuance
  A principal is liable for an agent's fraudulent acts if the principal clothed the agent with apparent authority, and the third party reasonably relied on that authority. The principal cannot deny the agent's authority under such circumstances.
• Narcisse v. Ill. Cent. Gulf R.R. Co.
  620 F.2d 544· 5th Cir.· 1980-07-03 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion in granting a new trial because the first jury's verdict was not against the great weight of the evidence and was within the universe of possible awards supported by the evidence.
• United States v. Pantone
  609 F.2d 675· 3d Cir.· 1979-07-19 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the admission of extrinsic evidence to rebut general denials of wrongdoing is within the trial court's discretion, and the prior ruling in Forsythe does not control this case.
• United States v. Arciniega
  574 F.2d 931· 7th Cir.· 1978-04-24 ·cited 17×
  The court held that allowing a deliberating jury to separate is within the sound discretion of the district court, and reversible error requires an objection with specific reasons and a showing of actual prejudice.
• Griffin v. Aluminum Co. OF Am.
  564 F.2d 1171· 5th Cir.· 1977-12-21 ·cited 17×
  The district court abused its discretion by dismissing a pro se plaintiff's complaint with prejudice for a single, unexcused failure to appear for a deposition, especially given his pro se and pauper status.
• In re the Pittsburgh & Lake Erie R.R. Co. Sec. & Antitrust Litig.
  543 F.2d 1058· 3d Cir.· 1976-09-01 ·cited 17×
  A pledgee of stock has standing to object to the settlement of a derivative suit, and the district court abused its discretion in approving a settlement that unfairly benefited minority shareholders at the expense of the corporation and the pledgee.
• Toohey v. Nitze
  429 F.2d 1332· 9th Cir.· 1970-07-29 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the government complied with administrative procedures and its action was supported by substantial evidence, thus affirming the summary judgment.
• Nor-Am Agric. Prods., Inc. v. Hardin
  435 F.2d 1133· 7th Cir.· 1970-07-15 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the Secretary's emergency suspension order was subject to judicial review and was an arbitrary exercise of authority.
• Silvia v. Zayre Corp.
  233 So. 2d 856· Fla. 3d DCA· 1970-04-07 ·cited 17×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For New Trial Motions
  Ronald Silvia sued Zayre Corporation for false imprisonment and malicious prosecution after being detained by store security officers on suspicion of shoplifting. A jury awarded him $18,000 in damages, but the trial judge granted the defendant's motion for new trial on the ground
• Diehl v. Louie L. Wainwright
  419 F.2d 1309· 5th Cir.· 1970-01-05 ·cited 17×·via Abuse Of Administrative Discretion
  The First Amendment does not grant prisoners an unlimited right to take correspondence courses; prison officials' decisions are administrative discretion.
• Allis-Chalmers Mfg. Co. v. White Consol. Indus., Inc.
  414 F.2d 506· 3d Cir.· 1969-07-18 ·cited 17×
  A preliminary injunction should issue because there is a reasonable probability that the merger would create a market structure conducive to unlawful reciprocal dealing.
• LaVonne D. Reilly v. Fuss
  170 So. 2d 475· Fla. 2d DCA· 1964-12-02 ·cited 17×
  A widow sued for wrongful death following an airplane crash but the trial court dismissed her action for lack of prosecution after a year of inactivity on the record, then denied her petition to reinstate. The appellate court affirmed, holding that while good cause for reinstatem
• Green v. Transitron Elec. Corp.
  326 F.2d 492· 1st Cir.· 1964-01-16 ·cited 17×
  The court held that while the district court did not abuse its discretion in most fee awards, it should have awarded some compensation to counsel who raised objections adopted by the court. The appellate court modified the judgment to award fees to these counsel.
• James River Ins. Co. v. Rich Bon Corp
  34 F.4th 1054· 11th Cir.· 2022-05-23 ·cited 16×
  A district court abuses its discretion by failing to consider all claims in a federal declaratory judgment action when deciding whether to dismiss the case in favor of a state court proceeding.
• United States v. Cuya
  964 F.3d 969· 11th Cir.· 2020-07-01 ·cited 16×
  A prisoner is not entitled to discovery before filing a motion to vacate a conviction or sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255.
• Kerrivan v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.
  953 F.3d 1196· 11th Cir.· 2020-03-24 ·cited 16×
  Kenneth Kerrivan, a Florida smoker who developed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease after decades of smoking, brought fraud and product liability claims against R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company and Philip Morris USA, seeking compensatory and punitive damages based on findings fro
• United States v. FOX
  926 F.3d 1275· 11th Cir.· 2019-06-13 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the five-level enhancement for a pattern of prohibited sexual conduct applies even if the repeated conduct involved only one victim, and that the defendant's age did not render his sentence substantively unreasonable.
• Odom v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.
  254 So. 3d 268· Fla.· 2018-09-20 ·cited 16×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed the Fourth District Court of Appeal's decision that had overturned a $4.5 million noneconomic damages award to an adult daughter for her mother's wrongful death from tobacco-related lung cancer. The Supreme Court held that the trial court did no
• Ness v. Martinez
  249 So. 3d 754· Fla. 1st DCA· 2018-06-13 ·cited 16×
  The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying relocation and modifying time-sharing, as competent, substantial evidence supported both decisions. However, the child support award was reversed and remanded because the court failed to make express findings regarding the p
• Walerowicz v. Hosang
  248 So. 3d 140· Fla. 4th DCA· 2018-05-23 ·cited 16×
  The trial court properly denied the defendant's motion for directed verdict regarding past medical expenses because the plaintiff's testimony describing her treatment procedures and relating them to the accident injuries, combined with the surgeon's testimony and the medical bill
• Saint Luc Jean Noel v. James B. Nutter & Co.
  232 So. 3d 1112· Fla. 3d DCA· 2017-11-01 ·cited 16×
  Two consolidated mortgage foreclosure cases where appellants sought relief from final judgments of attorney's fees under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b) based on excusable neglect. The trial court denied both motions, but the Third District Court of Appeal reversed, find
• Williams v. State
  209 So. 3d 543· Fla.· 2017-01-19 ·cited 16×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Continuance
  Donald Otis Williams was convicted of the 2010 kidnapping, robbery, and first-degree murder of an 81-year-old victim and sentenced to death by a jury vote of 9-3. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the convictions but reversed the death sentence because the jury's non-unanimous r
• U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Rodriguez
  206 So. 3d 734· Fla. 3d DCA· 2016-07-13 ·cited 16×
  U.S. Bank appealed dismissal of its foreclosure action based on sanctions for discovery violations and the Bank's decision to call a different witness at trial than previously ordered. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the record did not support the tria
• Chappelle v. S. Fla. Guardianship Program, Inc.
  169 So. 3d 291· Fla. 4th DCA· 2015-07-22 ·cited 16×
  In a guardianship dispute involving elder exploitation and fraud allegations, the trial court entered a judicial default against the defendants and awarded damages without properly considering the Kozel factors required before imposing such a severe sanction. The appellate court
• Cobbum v. Citimortgage, Inc.
  158 So. 3d 755· Fla. 2d DCA· 2015-02-27 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion by denying the appellants' oral motion to amend their answer and affirmative defenses.
• M.W. v. SPCP Grp. V, LLC
  163 So. 3d 518· Fla. 3d DCA· 2015-02-04 ·cited 16×·via Gross Abuse Of Discretion
  M.W., a minor plaintiff, appeals the trial court's decision to vacate an ex parte default judgment against SPCP Group V, LLC. The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's vacatur, holding that a plaintiff cannot obtain an ex parte default when the plaintiff knows
• Velloso v. State
  117 So. 3d 903· Fla. 4th DCA· 2013-07-31 ·cited 16×
  The court held that a trial court's denial of a motion for a new trial is reversible error if based on an incorrect legal standard, specifically applying the sufficiency of the evidence standard instead of the weight of the evidence standard.
• Fazzaro v. Fazzaro
  110 So. 3d 49· Fla. 2d DCA· 2013-03-08 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion by granting the mother final decision-making authority over all matters concerning the minor child, as this undermined the statutory preference for shared parental responsibility without sufficient justification.
• Clark v. State
  95 So. 3d 986· Fla. 2d DCA· 2012-08-22 ·cited 16×
  Willie Clark appealed the denial of his petition to remove sex offender registration requirements under Florida's "Romeo and Juliet" statute. The court affirmed the denial on jurisdictional and procedural grounds, holding that Clark's petition was untimely because he committed th
• Burtoff v. Alfred Tauber to Laszlo N. Tauber
  85 So. 3d 1182· Fla. 4th DCA· 2012-04-18 ·cited 16×
  Burtoff challenges an order denying his motion for an evidentiary hearing and to dissolve an injunction freezing his bank account. The Florida appellate court reversed because the injunction was issued without proper evidentiary hearing procedures and lacked required factual find
• Pharaoh Nshaka v. State
  82 So. 3d 174· Fla. 4th DCA· 2012-03-07 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the admission of similar crimes evidence was improper because the dissimilarities between the charged crime and the prior offenses substantially outweighed the similarities, but the denial of the motion to suppress was proper.
• Chacha v. Transp. USA, Inc.
  78 So. 3d 727· Fla. 4th DCA· 2012-02-08 ·cited 16×
  Ronald Chacha appeals the trial court's dismissal of his personal injury lawsuit for fraud on the court. The court dismissed the case with prejudice after finding that Chacha fraudulently concealed his prior back pain history from his treating physicians and in his discovery resp
• Cliff Berry, Inc. v. State
  116 So. 3d 394· Fla. 3d DCA· 2012-01-04 ·cited 16×
  Cliff Berry, Inc. and Jeffrey Clint Smith were convicted of grand theft related to allegedly stealing jet fuel and submitting fraudulent invoices for petroleum contaminated water (PCW) removal at Miami International Airport. The appellate court reversed, finding the trial court e
• Alvarez v. State
  75 So. 3d 420· Fla. 4th DCA· 2011-12-14 ·cited 16×
  Jorge Ivan Alvarez appeals his conviction for false imprisonment and assault, challenging the trial court's denial of his motion to substitute counsel the day before trial. The appellate court reversed, holding that the trial court abused its discretion by denying the substitutio
• Heriberto Vila v. State
  74 So. 3d 1110· Fla. 5th DCA· 2011-10-28 ·cited 16×
  Vila was convicted of burglary of a conveyance and battery. He appealed his battery conviction, arguing he was entitled to a jury instruction on justifiable use of non-deadly force based on self-defense. The court held that while Vila was entitled to the instruction, its omission
• Smith v. State
  59 So. 3d 1107· Fla.· 2011-03-17 ·cited 16×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a juror's surname alone is insufficient to trigger an inquiry into whether a peremptory strike was exercised in a discriminatory manner. The Court quashed the Third District's decision, which had allowed a trial court to conduct a Neil inquiry
• Morgan v. State
  42 So. 3d 862· Fla. 4th DCA· 2010-08-11 ·cited 16×
  Florida appellate court affirmed conviction for attempted second-degree murder, holding that the trial court properly instructed the jury on attempted voluntary manslaughter and did not abuse its discretion in denying a for-cause challenge to a juror with concerns about guns.
• Pulcini v. State
  41 So. 3d 338· Fla. 4th DCA· 2010-07-21 ·cited 16×
  Arthur Pulcini was convicted of unlawful sexual activity with a minor. On appeal, the Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding that the trial court abused its discretion by admitting Williams rule evidence (testimony about prior bad a
• Biscayne Park, LLC v. Wal-Mart Stores E., LP
  34 So. 3d 24· Fla. 3d DCA· 2010-02-17 ·cited 16×
  Biscayne Park appeals a trial court order granting Wal-Mart's motion for a temporary injunction to seal groundwater monitoring wells on Biscayne's property. The Third District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that Wal-Mart failed to establish the prerequisites for injunctive rel
• Criston Olympia McKINNEY v. State
  27 So. 3d 160· Fla. 1st DCA· 2010-01-29 ·cited 16×
  The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision not to sentence the defendant as a youthful offender, finding the decision was based on the defendant's circumstances and the nature of the crime, not the judge's personal opinion of the program.