Motion For Continuance

846 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 132 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Baldwin v. Lafayette Land Co.
  62 Fla. 129· Fla.· 1911-06-01 ·cited 14×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a judgment in a claim proceeding where a claimant sought to recover personal property seized under an execution. The court found the trial court's jury instructions were erroneous regarding fraudulent intent in preferential transfers from insolv
• Krock v. Irwin Rozinsky & State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
  78 So. 3d 38· Fla. 4th DCA· 2012-01-11 ·cited 13×
  Diane Krock appealed a trial court's decision denying her request for a continuance of a fee hearing and awarding attorney's fees to State Farm. The Fourth District affirmed, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the continuance request despite Kroc
• George Crowell, M.D. v. Barry Kaufmann, M.D.
  845 So. 2d 325· Fla. 2d DCA· 2003-05-21 ·cited 13×·via Motion To Continue
  The appellate court held that the trial court abused its discretion by denying a codefendant's motion to continue a summary judgment hearing when discovery was incomplete.
• Onett v. Ahola
  780 So. 2d 979· Fla. 5th DCA· 2001-03-09 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for continuance and stay, as the appellant failed to demonstrate prejudice.
• State v. Chamizo
  753 So. 2d 749· Fla. 3d DCA· 2000-03-22 ·cited 13×·via Continuance Of Hearing
  The Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles sought certiorari to review a circuit court decision that quashed a driver's license suspension based on a hearing officer's quashing of a subpoena for a backup officer. The appellate court granted certiorari, holding th
• United States v. Tham
  960 F.2d 1391· 9th Cir.· 1991-11-05 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the defendant's motions and issuing jury instructions, affirming his conviction and sentence.
• Lopez v. S. Coatings, Inc.
  580 So. 2d 864· Fla. 3d DCA· 1991-05-28 ·cited 13×
  An inadequate warning on a product cannot be the proximate cause of injury where the person to whom the manufacturer owed the duty to warn did not read the label, but summary judgment is improper where genuine issues of material fact remain regarding whether a product defect caus
• United States v. Taylor
  931 F.2d 842· 11th Cir.· 1991-05-20 ·cited 13×
  The district court lacked jurisdiction to revoke Taylor's probation sentence and re-sentence him while he was in the custody of the Attorney General and under the supervision of the U.S. Parole Commission.
• Beachum v. State
  547 So. 2d 288· Fla. 1st DCA· 1989-08-04 ·cited 13×
  Appellant Paulette McNair Beachum was convicted of battery on a law enforcement officer after the trial court denied her motion for continuance based on the absence of a key witness. The appellate court reversed, finding that the trial court abused its discretion by denying the c
• Jerry v. State
  99 Fla. 1330· Fla.· 1930-06-06 ·cited 13×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a conviction for aggravated assault, finding no abuse of discretion in the trial court's rulings on witness continuances, the participation of private counsel, evidentiary objections, or prosecutorial arguments. The court held that the trial cou
• Deal v. State
  145 So. 3d 212· Fla. 4th DCA· 2014-08-20 ·cited 12×
  Robert Deal appealed the revocation of his probation, arguing the trial court erred in denying his motion for a continuance to retain private counsel, among other issues. The appellate court reversed and remanded for a new violation of probation hearing, holding that the trial co
• Curry v. State
  880 So. 2d 751· Fla. 2d DCA· 2004-06-02 ·cited 12×·via Continuance Of Trial
  John Curry sought certiorari to quash a circuit court order denying his motion to dismiss a civil commitment petition under Florida's sexually violent predator statute. The court held that Curry validly waived his statutory right to trial within thirty days and never unequivocall
• Villages AT Mango KEY Homeowners Ass'n, Inc. v. Hunter Dev., Inc.
  699 So. 2d 337· Fla. 5th DCA· 1997-09-26 ·cited 12×
  A summary judgment should not be entered when the opposing party has not had a reasonable opportunity to complete discovery.
• Akins v. State
  694 So. 2d 847· Fla. 4th DCA· 1997-06-04 ·cited 12×
  Kenneth Akins appeals his first-degree murder conviction, challenging the trial court's refusal to excuse juror Kennedy for cause. Although the appellate court found that the juror should have been excused based on her equivocal statements about the presumption of innocence, it a
• United States v. Smith
  788 F.2d 663· 10th Cir.· 1986-04-03 ·cited 12×·via Continuance Of Trial
  The court held that the superseding indictment was not fatally defective despite a change in the administrative title of the National Credit Union Administration, and that the denial of severance motions was not an abuse of discretion.
• Carter v. State
  469 So. 2d 775· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-12-06 ·cited 12×
  Carter was convicted of throwing a deadly missile at a building in violation of Florida Statute § 790.19. The appellate court affirmed, holding that the exact identity of the object need not be proved if evidence establishes its nature and capability to cause death or great bodil
• State v. McCRERY
  429 So. 2d 739· Fla. 1st DCA· 1983-03-29 ·cited 12×
  Florida appeals the trial court's discharge of defendants under the Speedy Trial Rule after the defendants obtained a continuance in September 1980. The court holds that when a defendant moves for and obtains a continuance, the 180-day speedy trial period is automatically waived,
• United States v. Greene
  698 F.2d 1364· 9th Cir.· 1983-01-28 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the record did not provide a basis to reverse for an alleged due process violation regarding the use of pretrial silence for impeachment, nor did it allow for review of a federal evidentiary rule challenge.
• United States v. McDONALD
  672 F.2d 864· 11th Cir.· 1982-04-05 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for continuance and that the imposition of consecutive sentences after retrial was permissible.
• United States v. Mert LeRoy Wolf
  645 F.2d 665· 8th Cir.· 1981-04-15 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the appellant's requested continuance, nor was the conviction obtained with the use of false evidence, and the prosecutor's closing argument was permissible and non-prejudicial.
• United States v. Gonzales-Palma
  645 F.2d 844· 10th Cir.· 1981-03-02 ·cited 12×
  The court held that classifying heroin as a Schedule I controlled substance is a question of law, not fact, and that denying a continuance was not an abuse of discretion. The court also found sufficient evidence to support the conspiracy conviction.
• Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. NEW London Enters., Ltd.
  619 F.2d 1099· 5th Cir.· 1980-06-25 ·cited 12×
  The court held that federal subject matter jurisdiction exists for Georgia confirmation proceedings under 12 U.S.C. § 1819, and that there is no right to a jury trial in such proceedings.
• Andrews v. State
  372 So. 2d 143· Fla. 3d DCA· 1979-06-12 ·cited 12×
  Patricia Andrews was convicted of first-degree murder, robbery, burglary, and petty larceny in a joint trial with co-defendant Sublette for the beating death of Louis Broeker during a home invasion. The court affirmed the conviction, rejecting Andrews' claims that denial of sever
• Durcan v. State
  350 So. 2d 525· Fla. 3d DCA· 1977-10-04 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the defendant's motions for continuance.
• United States v. Brugger
  549 F.2d 2· 7th Cir.· 1977-01-26 ·cited 12×
  The court held that denying a second continuance did not violate the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel, nor did the timing of the probation revocation hearing violate his Fifth Amendment rights.
• In re Keith Monroe. United States v. Adelle Raye White and Jerald E. Evers
  532 F.2d 424· 5th Cir.· 1976-05-27 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the attorney's actions did not constitute contempt because it was physically impossible for him to appear and his delays did not rise to the level of willful or flagrant disregard for the court.
• United States v. Bryan
  534 F.2d 205· 9th Cir.· 1976-04-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying a continuance, admitting evidence of a prior conviction, or in allowing a juror to continue after contact with a witness. The evidence was also sufficient to support the conviction.
• Gavino v. Hon. Lloyd F. MacMAHON
  499 F.2d 1191· 2d Cir.· 1974-06-14 ·cited 12×·via Continuance Of Trial
  The court held that the district judge's revocation of bail and refusal to grant a continuance were an abuse of discretion and violated the defendant's fundamental rights.
• United States v. Weathers
  431 F.2d 1258· 3d Cir.· 1970-10-06 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the defense counsel's motions for a continuance, nor did the challenged statutes abridge the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.
• United States v. Denver Lane Moore
  419 F.2d 810· 6th Cir.· 1969-12-30 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the denial of continuances did not prejudice the defendant and the jury instruction on consent to search was proper.
• DE Welles v. United States
  372 F.2d 67· 7th Cir.· 1967-01-26 ·cited 12×
  Claims of illegal search and seizure and denial of effective assistance of counsel are not cognizable in a § 2255 proceeding if they were or could have been raised on direct appeal.
• Graham v. The Pa. R.R. & The Wash. Terminal Co.
  342 F.2d 914· D.C. Cir.· 1964-12-10 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the District Court did not abuse its discretion in denying a motion to enlarge the time for substituting a party under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(a)(1).
• McKESSON & Robbins v. Rosa O. Barwick and her husband
  95 So. 2d 601· Fla.· 1957-06-05 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a motion for continuance and that the jury's verdict was not excessive given the evidence presented.
• Bank of China v. Wells Fargo Bank & Union Tr. Co. (two cases)
  209 F.2d 467· 9th Cir.· 1953-12-21 ·cited 12×·via Continuance Of Trial
  The court held that Wells Fargo should be relieved of liability for interest on a disputed deposit because the circumstances presented complex legal and factual issues without clear precedent, making it inequitable to penalize the bank.
• Diehl v. State
  117 Fla. 816· Fla.· 1935-01-02 ·cited 12×
  John Diehl was convicted of manslaughter for causing the death of a thirteen-year-old girl by negligently driving an automobile that struck her on July 3, 1933. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the conviction on the ground that jurors who had served in the previous week of the
• Garden v. Garden
  834 So. 2d 190· Fla. 2d DCA· 2002-08-02 ·cited 11×
  In this dissolution of marriage appeal, the court reversed the trial court's grant of the defendant husband's counsel's motion to withdraw immediately before trial commenced, finding the withdrawal violated Florida rules requiring proper notice and hearing, and that counsel faile
• State v. Calle
  560 So. 2d 355· Fla. 5th DCA· 1990-04-26 ·cited 11×
  Florida appeals the trial court's discharge of Ignacio Calle from drug trafficking and paraphernalia charges based on the state's failure to bring him to trial within 175 days of arrest under the speedy trial rule. The court reverses, holding that the state is entitled to a 15-da
• LEE v. Winston
  717 F.2d 888· 4th Cir.· 1983-09-14 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the involuntary surgical removal of a bullet from a suspect's body, under the circumstances presented, would violate the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches. It also held that such a claim is cognizable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, not habea
• Oatman v. State
  289 So. 2d 431· Fla. 3d DCA· 1974-01-22 ·cited 11×
• Anderson v. State
  93 So. 3d 1201· Fla. 1st DCA· 2012-08-09 ·cited 10×·via Continuance Of Trial
  Andrew Anderson appeals an involuntary civil commitment order under the Jimmy Ryce Act, challenging the trial court's jurisdiction and claiming violation of the mandatory 30-day trial requirement. The court affirmed the commitment order, finding that Anderson and his counsel acti
• Arnold v. Arnold
  889 So. 2d 215· Fla. 2d DCA· 2004-12-17 ·cited 10×
  Chris Arnold appeals a final judgment of dissolution of marriage, arguing the trial court abused its discretion by denying his motion for continuance without proper notice of the final hearing. The appellate court reversed the judgment, finding the trial court relied on incompete
• Kmart Corp. & O'Gorman Long, Inc. v. Hayes
  707 So. 2d 957· Fla. 3d DCA· 1998-04-01 ·cited 10×
  In this slip-and-fall case, the appellate court vacated an order granting a new trial after a jury verdict for the defendants, holding that the plaintiff failed to preserve the issue of alleged false testimony by the defendant's witness through timely trial objection or motion.
• Est. OF Conway Brock v. Newman D. Brock
  695 So. 2d 714· Fla. 1st DCA· 1996-07-29 ·cited 10×
  In this third appeal regarding the probate of Dr. Conway Brock's estate, the court addressed whether the probate judge properly assessed costs against the will contestant and approved professional compensation without adequate findings or procedure. The court affirmed the cost as
• Lubarsky v. Sweden House Props. OF Boca Raton, Inc.
  673 So. 2d 975· Fla. 4th DCA· 1996-05-29 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment before allowing the plaintiffs to complete discovery, specifically by denying their motion for a continuance to depose a key witness.
• Griffin v. State
  598 So. 2d 254· Fla. 1st DCA· 1992-05-11 ·cited 10×
  The trial court erred in denying the appellant's motion for a continuance when the state's late disclosure of a key eyewitness prejudiced the appellant's ability to prepare an adequate defense.
• United States v. Spine
  945 F.2d 143· 6th Cir.· 1991-09-23 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a district court's denial of a continuance for extensive juror tax history searches was not an abuse of discretion when balanced with the need for judicial efficiency and when supplemented by thorough voir dire. The court also held that computer-generated IRS
• United States v. Larouche
  896 F.2d 815· 4th Cir.· 1990-01-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for a continuance and that the defendants failed to demonstrate specific prejudice resulting from the denial. The court also found sufficient evidence to support the convictions.
• Thrasher v. State
  528 So. 2d 474· Fla. 1st DCA· 1988-07-08 ·cited 10×
  George David Thrasher appeals his conviction for burglary of a structure after being found crouching in a bar's restroom with burglary tools and stolen coins. The Florida District Court of Appeal affirms the conviction and sentence but reverses the restitution order for the Beer
• United States v. Perrera
  842 F.2d 73· 4th Cir.· 1988-03-23 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the prosecutor's comments at sentencing were permissible under the plea agreement and that the district court adequately addressed disputed facts in the presentence report. The court also held that the denial of a continuance and a handwriting expert to the co
• United States v. Gentry
  839 F.2d 1065· 5th Cir.· 1988-03-02 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding that searches were justified by probable cause or consent, evidence supported conspiracy charges, and defenses like entrapment and overreaching were not applicable.