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

• Fed. Ins. Co. v. Allister Mfg. Co.
  622 So. 2d 1348· Fla. 4th DCA· 1993-08-11 ·cited 14×
  An insurer sued a manufacturer for allegedly defective garage door opener system that caused a house fire. The trial court granted summary judgment after excluding all evidence regarding the garage door opener based on plaintiff's expert's inadvertent loss of the product, but the
• Crystal v. State
  616 So. 2d 150· Fla. 1st DCA· 1993-03-30 ·cited 14×
  Roderick Crystal appealed his conviction for burglary with assault and attempted murder, arguing the trial court failed to conduct a proper inquiry into whether he knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel before representing himself at trial. The appellate court re
• Stone v. State
  616 So. 2d 1041· Fla. 4th DCA· 1993-03-17 ·cited 14×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard On Appeal
  Mary Stone was convicted of attempted first degree murder and sought a new trial based on allegedly newly discovered evidence in the form of her victim's affidavit recanting her original testimony. The Florida appellate court affirmed the trial court's denial of the motion, holdi
• Thompson v. Publix Supermarkets, Inc.
  615 So. 2d 796· Fla. 1st DCA· 1993-03-16 ·cited 14×
  A plaintiff sought to amend her complaint to add a defendant after her initial count against that defendant was dismissed for failure to state a cause of action. The trial court denied her motion for rehearing requesting permission to file a second amended complaint. The appellat
• United States v. Rockwell
  984 F.2d 1112· 10th Cir.· 1993-01-29 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the presence of a controlled substance in a person's body constitutes possession for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. § 3583(g), and that a district court may not impose both incarceration and further supervised release upon revocation of supervised release.
• United States v. Royal
  972 F.2d 643· 5th Cir.· 1992-09-08 ·cited 14×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  The court held that the admission of certain evidence, even if erroneous, was harmless error due to overwhelming evidence of guilt, and that the defendant's sentence was properly calculated based on drug quantity as a sentencing factor.
• Akinyemi v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  969 F.2d 285· 7th Cir.· 1992-07-16 ·cited 14×
  The BIA abused its discretion by failing to consider evidence of rehabilitation when determining eligibility for a discretionary waiver of deportation under section 212(c).
• United States v. McILVAIN
  967 F.2d 1479· 10th Cir.· 1992-06-30 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by ordering restitution without considering the defendant's financial resources, needs, and earning ability.
• S & R Corp. v. Jiffy Lube Int'l, Inc.
  968 F.2d 371· 3d Cir.· 1992-06-23 ·cited 14×
  A franchisor's right to terminate a franchise agreement for non-payment of royalties is independent of any claims the franchisee may have against the franchisor for breach of contract, and post-termination unauthorized use of the trademark constitutes infringement.
• United States v. Robinson
  967 F.2d 287· 9th Cir.· 1992-06-15 ·cited 14×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Continuance
  The court held that federal prosecution did not violate due process, ineffective assistance of counsel claims are generally for collateral attack, the denial of a continuance was not an abuse of discretion, there was sufficient evidence for the conviction, and the sentence was pr
• Glendening v. State
  604 So. 2d 839· Fla. 2d DCA· 1992-05-13 ·cited 14×
  David Glendening appeals the denial of his Rule 3.850 postconviction relief motion following conviction for sexual battery on a child. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's denial, finding no abuse of discretion regarding witness recantation claims or Brady violations.
• Benedictor Diaz-Resendez v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  960 F.2d 493· 5th Cir.· 1992-05-12 ·cited 14×
  The Board of Immigration Appeals abused its discretion by failing to properly weigh positive equities and meaningfully address all relevant factors when denying discretionary relief from deportation.
• White v. Pence
  961 F.2d 776· 8th Cir.· 1992-04-13 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court applied an incorrect legal standard when denying the motion for a new trial, and that the case must be remanded for reconsideration under the proper standard.
• United States v. Concemi
  957 F.2d 942· 1st Cir.· 1992-03-04 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no abuse of discretion or plain error in the trial court's rulings regarding jury instructions, evidence exclusion, Fifth Amendment privilege, subpoena quashing, sufficiency of evidence, or denial of a continuance.
• United States v. Wood
  958 F.2d 963· 10th Cir.· 1992-02-26 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting a new trial due to jury exposure to extraneous materials, and that double jeopardy does not bar retrial on either count.
• United States v. $38
  950 F.2d 1108· 5th Cir.· 1992-01-15 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a bare assertion of ownership is insufficient to establish standing in a forfeiture action, but the government's admission of the claimant's involvement with the seized currency was sufficient. However, the court affirmed the striking of the claim and answer a
• United States v. Cook
  952 F.2d 1262· 10th Cir.· 1991-12-31 ·cited 14×
  The court held that restitution can only be ordered for the specific conduct underlying the offense of conviction, not for all counts in an indictment when only some were pled to.
• Bouman v. Block
  940 F.2d 1211· 9th Cir.· 1991-07-23 ·cited 14×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  The court affirmed the district court's findings on timely filing, standing, and most discrimination claims, but remanded for further findings on specific issues including policy authority, back pay, punitive damages, and attorney's fees.
• United States v. Martinez
  938 F.2d 1078· 10th Cir.· 1991-07-08 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district judge did not abuse her discretion in admitting evidence of firearms, large sums of cash, and illegal drugs seized from a residence and the defendant's person, as these items were probative of the defendant's involvement in drug trafficking.
• Hendrickson v. Branstad
  934 F.2d 158· 8th Cir.· 1991-05-23 ·cited 14×
  The court held that while the plaintiff was a prevailing party entitled to attorney's fees, the district court erred in granting a twenty-five percent enhancement based on the results achieved and the contingent nature of the case, as these factors were already reflected in the l
• Price v. Gen. Motors Corp.
  931 F.2d 162· 1st Cir.· 1991-04-26 ·cited 14×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Discovery Rulings
  The court held that the district court did not err in granting summary judgment for GMC, as the plaintiffs failed to present sufficient evidence of a defect attributable to GMC's negligence that caused the accident.
• Castillo-Rodriguez v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  929 F.2d 181· 5th Cir.· 1991-04-22 ·cited 14×·via Arbitrary, Capricious, Or Abuse Of Discretion Standard
  The court held that it has jurisdiction to review the Board of Immigration Appeals' final order, even if the petition for review technically designates the immigration judge's order, and that substantial evidence supported the Board's denial of asylum.
• United States v. Jimenez
  928 F.2d 356· 10th Cir.· 1991-03-19 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed the conviction but vacated the sentence, remanding for resentencing due to a procedural error in addressing disputed facts in the presentence report.
• United States v. Stephenson
  928 F.2d 728· 6th Cir.· 1991-03-15 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in revoking supervised release due to insufficient reliable evidence of violations and a failure to provide a written statement of relied-upon evidence and reasons.
• Miller v. Metro. Life Ins. Co.
  925 F.2d 979· 6th Cir.· 1991-02-15 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion to amend or in granting summary judgment, as the insurer acted reasonably and not arbitrarily and capriciously in terminating benefits.
• United States v. Ibanez
  924 F.2d 427· 2d Cir.· 1991-01-15 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying a two-point reduction for acceptance of responsibility and in calculating the defendant's Criminal History Category.
• Associated Builders & Contractors OF La., Inc. v. The Orleans Parish Sch. Bd.
  919 F.2d 374· 5th Cir.· 1990-12-19 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the plaintiff was a prevailing party entitled to attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in calculating the award or in considering the timeliness of the request.
• United States v. Chan Yu-Chong
  920 F.2d 594· 9th Cir.· 1990-12-06 ·cited 14×·via Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Evidentiary Rulings
  The court held that the seized heroin and unidentified powder constituted a 'mixture or substance' for sentencing purposes, the sentencing scheme based on quantity was constitutional, and prosecutorial comments and evidence of prior bad acts did not warrant reversal.
• Nelison Anderson v. United Parcel Serv.
  915 F.2d 313· 7th Cir.· 1990-10-05 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the plaintiffs' suit as a sanction for their contumacious conduct and failure to comply with court rules and orders.
• United States v. Walker
  915 F.2d 480· 9th Cir.· 1990-09-25 ·cited 14×
• City OF LOS Angeles & City of N.Y. v. Nat'l Hwy. Traffic Safety Admin.
  912 F.2d 478· D.C. Cir.· 1990-08-24 ·cited 14×
  The court holds that NRDC has standing under NEPA for the MY 1989 CAFE rollback and that the agency's compliance with environmental review requirements is a merits issue, not a standing issue.
• United States v. Metallo
  908 F.2d 795· 11th Cir.· 1990-08-09 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence, the jury instruction was proper, and the sentencing procedures were followed.
• Amendola v. Bayer
  907 F.2d 760· 7th Cir.· 1990-07-24 ·cited 14×·via Abuse Of Discretion (Appellate Review)
  The court held that the district court did not err in granting summary judgment for the defendant on claims of breach of oral agreement and breach of fiduciary duty, nor in denying the plaintiff leave to amend his complaint.
• In re Grand Jury Subpoenas. United States v. Anderson
  906 F.2d 1485· 10th Cir.· 1990-07-02 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the identity of the source of legal fees and related payment information are not normally protected by the attorney-client privilege, and that the Sixth Amendment right to counsel is not violated by subpoenas for such information unless an actual conflict of i
• Perket v. Sec'y OF Health & Human Servs.
  905 F.2d 129· 6th Cir.· 1990-06-08 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a claimant whose disability benefits were reinstated following a remand under the Social Security Disability Benefits Reform Act (DBRA) can be considered a prevailing party for attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) if their victory was ine
• First Nationwide Bank v. Summer House Joint Venture
  902 F.2d 1197· 5th Cir.· 1990-06-05 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the notice of appeal was untimely as to the underlying judgment because the post-judgment motion was a Rule 60(b) motion, not a Rule 59 motion, and thus did not extend the time to appeal. The court affirmed the denial of the Rule 60(b) motion.
• Vogelsang v. Patterson Dental Co.
  904 F.2d 427· 8th Cir.· 1990-05-29 ·cited 14×
  A notice of appeal is filed when received by the district court clerk, not when mailed, and mailing a notice of appeal does not constitute excusable neglect for a late filing.
• United States v. Rodriguez-Castro
  908 F.2d 438· 9th Cir.· 1990-05-10 ·cited 14×
  The court held that while the district court's reasons for departing from the Sentencing Guidelines were valid, it failed to adequately explain the degree of departure by analogy to higher criminal history categories, requiring remand.
• Jordan v. Cameron Iron Works, Inc.
  900 F.2d 53· 5th Cir.· 1990-05-04 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Administrative Committee's interpretation of the disability plan, which terminated benefits when an employee could perform light duty work, was legally correct and not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Heidecke
  900 F.2d 1155· 7th Cir.· 1990-05-01 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the defendant failed to establish a colorable basis for claims of vindictive prosecution and double jeopardy, and that his waiver of the statute of limitations was knowing and voluntary.
• Floyd v. United States
  900 F.2d 1045· 7th Cir.· 1990-04-20 ·cited 14×
  Simple attorney negligence, without extenuating circumstances, does not constitute good cause for failure to timely serve a summons and complaint under Rule 4(j), even if dismissal would bar the claim.
• United States v. Casimiro Gomez, Jr.
  901 F.2d 728· 9th Cir.· 1990-04-02 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in departing upward from the Sentencing Guidelines due to the defendant's callous disregard for the safety of the undocumented aliens he transported.
• The Gen. Contracting & Trading Co., LLC v. Interpole, Inc.
  899 F.2d 109· 1st Cir.· 1990-03-27 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to set aside the default judgment, nor in denying the offset of judgments, nor in awarding attorneys' fees. However, the court found the district court erred in its handling of the personal jurisdicti
• Alberti v. Klevenhagen
  896 F.2d 927· 5th Cir.· 1990-03-21 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court erred in accepting all claimed hours without specific findings on reasonableness and in applying certain enhancements to the fee award, but affirmed the compensation for delay in payment.
• Puett v. Blandford
  912 F.2d 270· 9th Cir.· 1990-02-08 ·cited 14×
  An incarcerated pro se plaintiff proceeding in forma pauperis is entitled to rely on the U.S. Marshal for service, and should not be penalized for the Marshal's failure to properly effect service if the plaintiff provided necessary information.
• Pincus v. Pabst Brewing Co.
  893 F.2d 1544· 7th Cir.· 1990-01-23 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the right of first refusal was validly supported by consideration and triggered by Pabst's expression of intent to accept Armak's offer, but the damages awarded were excessive.
• Kraemer v. Grant Cnty.
  892 F.2d 686· 7th Cir.· 1990-01-09 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the imposition of Rule 11 sanctions was erroneous because the attorney conducted a reasonable investigation under the circumstances before filing the complaint.
• United States v. Oliyinka Sobamowo
  892 F.2d 90· D.C. Cir.· 1989-12-19 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed convictions, holding that wiretap evidence was admissible, the evidence was sufficient for conspiracy convictions, and various procedural and instructional errors were either harmless or did not occur.
• Commonwealth Mortg. Corp. OF Am., L.P. v. Frankhouse
  551 So. 2d 599· Fla. 4th DCA· 1989-11-08 ·cited 14×
  In a mortgage foreclosure case involving a VA-guaranteed loan, the trial court denied the mortgagee's motion to postpone the judicial sale due to inability to timely obtain VA bidding instructions. The appellate court reversed, holding that the trial court abused its discretion b
• United States v. Ross
  886 F.2d 264· 9th Cir.· 1989-09-26 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court committed plain error by failing to excuse a juror who stated she could not be fair to the defendant.