Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 53(B)

12 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Union Cnty. Jail Inmates v. DI Buono
  713 F.2d 984· 3d Cir.· 1983-08-11 ·cited 42×
  The court held that while overcrowding conditions at the jail may be constitutionally problematic, the Commissioner's actions in assigning state prisoners to the jail were not unconstitutional, and the district court erred in voiding the Executive Orders and enjoining the Commiss
• Cleveland J. Stockton and Dorothy Altman Stockton v. Altman
  432 F.2d 946· 5th Cir.· 1970-09-22 ·cited 34×
• Howes Leather Co., Inc. v. Honorable Walter J. LA BUY
  226 F.2d 703· 7th Cir.· 1955-10-13 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a congested calendar and complex issues, without more, do not constitute exceptional circumstances justifying reference to a master under Rule 53(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
• In re United States
  816 F.2d 1083· 6th Cir.· 1987-04-08 ·cited 16×
  The court held that referring dispositive motions to a special master in a non-jury case, absent exceptional circumstances, constitutes an abuse of discretion under Rule 53(b).
• United States v. State OF Wash.
  730 F.2d 1314· 9th Cir.· 1984-04-12 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Makah Tribe's usual and accustomed fishing grounds did not extend 100 miles offshore in 1855, affirming the district court's 40-mile boundary.
• United States v. Wallace
  201 F.2d 65· 10th Cir.· 1952-12-24 ·cited 12×
  The court held that while a jury trial is generally a right in condemnation cases, it is not absolute and can be referred to a commission under exceptional circumstances.
• In re United States Dep't OF Def.
  848 F.2d 232· D.C. Cir.· 1988-06-03 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the district judge did not abuse his discretion in appointing a special master to review classified documents in a FOIA case, as exceptional circumstances justified the appointment under Rule 53(b).
• Tights, Inc. v. The Honorable Edwin M. Stanley
  441 F.2d 336· 4th Cir.· 1971-04-12 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Seventh Amendment preserves the right to a jury trial for patent validity and infringement issues when joined with a claim for monetary damages.
• Todd Shipyards Corp. v. Jasper Elec. Serv. Co.
  414 F.2d 8· 5th Cir.· 1969-07-03 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court committed reversible errors in jury instructions and special issue framing, particularly regarding the substantial performance doctrine and duplicative damage awards.
• Wooldridge v. Marlene Indus. Corp.
  875 F.2d 540· 6th Cir.· 1989-05-18 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the district court's finding that the maternity leave policy in North and South Carolina plants did not violate Title VII was not clearly erroneous, but the district court applied incorrect legal principles in the damages phase by misallocating the burden of p
• Rogers v. Societe Internationale Pour Participations Industrielles ET Commerciales, S.A.
  278 F.2d 268· D.C. Cir.· 1960-04-14 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a broad reference of all issues, including trial and findings of fact and law, to a master is improper absent exceptional circumstances, as it constitutes an abdication of the judicial function.