Manifest Abuse Of Discretion

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

• Smith v. Welch
  189 F.2d 832· 10th Cir.· 1951-05-22 ·cited 62×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in its jury instructions, its handling of evidence, or its refusal to grant a new trial.
• United States v. O'Neill
  767 F.2d 780· 11th Cir.· 1985-08-02 ·cited 59×
  The court affirmed the drug convictions for most counts but vacated Mallard's sentence due to procedural error in the sentencing hearing and remanded for resentencing.
• Edynak v. Atl. Shipping Inc. CIE.
  562 F.2d 215· 3d Cir.· 1977-08-15 ·cited 53×
  The court held that federal maritime law applied to the longshoreman's injury occurring on navigable waters and that the jury could reasonably find the vessel unseaworthy based on the improper method of unloading, even if caused by a longshoreman's negligence.
• United States v. van Dyke
  605 F.2d 220· 6th Cir.· 1979-09-13 ·cited 47×
  The court affirmed the conviction, finding no merit in the defendant's claims regarding speedy trial, fair trial, admission of evidence, or jury misconduct.
• Norwilton Murray v. Fairbanks Morse
  610 F.2d 149· 3d Cir.· 1979-11-29 ·cited 46×
  The court affirmed the judgment, holding that the Virgin Islands comparative negligence statute could be applied to strict products liability actions to reduce damages based on plaintiff's fault, and that the jury's damage award was not excessive.
• Baker v. United States Steel Corp.
  492 F.2d 1074· 2d Cir.· 1974-02-25 ·cited 46×
  The court should allow appeal of interlocutory orders releasing grand jury testimony, as the practical finality of disclosure outweighs the technical interlocutory nature, especially when there's no authority supporting the release.
• Bartlett-Collins Co. v. Surinam Navigation Co.
  381 F.2d 546· 10th Cir.· 1967-02-20 ·cited 32×
  The court held that ocean carriers are entitled to recover freight charges from shippers, even if the carriers' agent's conduct caused the shippers to pay twice, and that the issue of the forwarder's agency for the carriers could not be raised for the first time on appeal.
• Atl. City Elec. Co. v. A. B. Chance Co.
  313 F.2d 431· 2d Cir.· 1963-01-31 ·cited 32×
  The court held that interlocutory review of an order allowing the use of grand jury testimony in a civil deposition is not warranted under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) absent a manifest abuse of discretion.
• Corriz v. Emilio Naranjo
  667 F.2d 892· 10th Cir.· 1981-12-09 ·cited 30×
  The court held that defendants' objections regarding potential double recovery were not properly preserved for appeal because they failed to make specific objections to the jury instructions or verdict forms as required by Rule 51.
• Xerox Corp. v. SCM Corp.
  534 F.2d 1031· 2d Cir.· 1976-04-15 ·cited 30×
  The court held that interlocutory appeals of discovery orders are generally not permitted without specific certification or a showing of manifest abuse of discretion.
• Tucker v. The United States
  624 F.2d 1029· Ct. Cl.· 1980-06-18 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the plaintiff's removal was proper because there was substantial evidence of intentional falsification of travel vouchers, the removal promoted the efficiency of the FAA, and the penalty was not disproportionate.
• Richardson v. The City OF Albuquerque
  857 F.2d 727· 10th Cir.· 1988-09-22 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the jury's verdict for the defendants on discrimination claims was supported by sufficient evidence and that the trial court correctly directed a verdict against the plaintiff's due process claim.
• NOE v. State
  586 So. 2d 371· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-08-07 ·cited 13×
  Julia Noe was convicted of first-degree murder and aggravated child abuse in the death of her three-year-old son. On appeal, the First District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for a new trial based on the trial court's erroneous denial of challenges for cause to two prospec
• Howard v. Mr. Leoneal Davis
  815 F.2d 1429· 11th Cir.· 1987-05-04 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the district court did not err in refusing to consider an unexhausted claim and that Howard's other claims lacked merit.
• Alers v. The United States
  633 F.2d 559· Ct. Cl.· 1980-07-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the plaintiff's removal was proper because she intentionally falsified official government documents, and the Appeals Authority's decision was supported by substantial evidence, not arbitrary or capricious, and free from procedural irregularity.
• Bayard W. Kennett v. DELTA AIR Lines, Inc.
  560 F.2d 456· 1st Cir.· 1977-07-28 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the jury's verdict was not excessive and that the trial court did not err in its jury instructions or its responses to jury questions, particularly regarding the exclusion of income taxes from damage calculations.
• United States v. Brenneman
  918 F.2d 745· 8th Cir.· 1990-11-08 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a district court may be influenced by the Sentencing Guidelines when imposing a pre-Guidelines sentence, provided the sentence is within statutory limits and not a gross abuse of discretion.
• Estes v. S. Pac. Transp. Co.
  598 F.2d 1195· 10th Cir.· 1979-05-14 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the trial court's judgment, holding that the locomotive unit was not in use under the Boiler Inspection Act and that the jury's award was not so inadequate as to warrant a new trial.
• Gtech Corp. v. State of Fla. Dep't OF the Lottery & Automated Wagering Int'l, Inc
  737 So. 2d 615· Fla. 1st DCA· 1999-07-22
  GTECH Corporation challenged the Florida Department of the Lottery's decision to refer contract proposals back to the same evaluation committee for rescoring after a bid protest hearing. The court affirmed the Department's award to Automated Wagering International, holding that r
• Campbell v. Bartlett
  975 F.2d 1569· 10th Cir.· 1992-10-06
  The court affirmed the judgment, holding that service by posting at the sister's residence was valid and satisfied due process, and that the ICC endorsement negated the insurer's cooperation defense.