Preponderance Of The Evidence

3,086 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 56 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• United States v. Barth
  899 F.2d 199· 2d Cir.· 1990-03-27 ·cited 8×
  Transcribed oral findings can satisfy the written statement requirement for probation revocation, and sufficient evidence supported the revocation for travel abroad, but the court must explicitly consider the seriousness of the violation.
• Tafoya v. Sears Roebuck & Co. & Roper Corp.
  884 F.2d 1330· 10th Cir.· 1989-09-01 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a seller can be deemed a manufacturer under Colorado strict liability statutes if they have substantial ownership or control over the manufacturer, and that the crashworthiness doctrine applies to riding lawnmowers.
• United States v. de Ortiz
  883 F.2d 515· 7th Cir.· 1989-08-16 ·cited 8×
  The court's use of 'slight evidence' or 'slight connection' language in conspiracy cases is problematic and should be reexamined or discarded in favor of clearer formulations.
• N. Miss. Commc'ns, Inc. v. Jones
  874 F.2d 1064· 5th Cir.· 1989-06-12 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Mt. Healthy burden-shifting analysis should apply to this case involving alleged retaliation for critical speech, vacating the prior judgment.
• Donnie D. Marshall and Christie A. Marshall v. EL Paso Natural GAS Co. & Meridian Oil Prod., Inc.
  874 F.2d 1373· 10th Cir.· 1989-05-17 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not err in refusing to refer the case to the Oklahoma Corporation Commission under the doctrine of primary jurisdiction, in excluding certain evidence, or in its jury instructions regarding punitive damages.
• McFADDEN v. State
  529 So. 2d 351· Fla. 1st DCA· 1988-08-08 ·cited 8×
  McFadden appealed his conviction and 30-year sentence for attempted sexual battery with great force and attempted kidnapping, challenging the trial court's departure from the recommended 20-year guideline sentence. The appellate court affirmed the sentence, finding that the defen
• Brown v. Bowen
  847 F.2d 342· 7th Cir.· 1988-05-12 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the administrative law judge's decision denying benefits was supported by substantial evidence, as the ALJ could rationally distinguish between the lower burden of proof for excusing repayment and the higher 'clear and convincing' standard required for establi
• Ward v. United States
  838 F.2d 182· 6th Cir.· 1988-02-03 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court's finding that the surgeon did not breach the applicable standard of care was not clearly erroneous, and that medical articles could be considered as evidence even if not received as exhibits.
• Antinogenes Rodriguez v. State
  519 So. 2d 1079· Fla. 1st DCA· 1988-01-29 ·cited 8×
  A defendant appealed a trial court's denial of his motion to suppress cocaine found in his vehicle during a search by a Florida Highway Patrol officer. The appellate court affirmed, holding that the defendant validly consented to the search of his trunk where cocaine was discover
• United States v. Spencer
  836 F.2d 236· 6th Cir.· 1987-12-31 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defendant failed to establish a "fair and just" reason to withdraw his guilty plea, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion.
• United States v. Jaramillo-Montoya
  834 F.2d 276· 2d Cir.· 1987-12-01 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the address book was properly admitted as a coconspirator's statement and that the sentence was not disproportionate.
• Dockie Prater v. Hite Preparation Co.
  829 F.2d 1363· 6th Cir.· 1987-09-22 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Administrative Law Judge (AU) did not err in weighing conflicting medical evidence and properly declined to invoke the interim presumption of disability for black lung benefits.
• United States v. Alain Asland Perez
  824 F.2d 1567· 11th Cir.· 1987-08-24 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions and that co-conspirator statements were properly admitted under the James standard.
• D.R.C.D.T., Inc. v. Integrity Ins. Co.
  816 F.2d 273· 6th Cir.· 1987-04-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting a new trial on the issue of fraud, and that Michigan law requires fraud to be proven by clear and convincing evidence. However, the court reversed the district court's assessment of interest on the am
• In re Grand Jury Proceedings
  797 F.2d 1377· 6th Cir.· 1986-07-31 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the conspiracy charged in the indictment was not the same offense as other conspiracies for which the defendants had been tried or indicted, and therefore, the double jeopardy clause did not bar the prosecution.
• Palace Ent., Inc. v. Bituminous Cas. Corp.
  793 F.2d 842· 7th Cir.· 1986-06-12 ·cited 8×
  The court held that an insurer asserting arson as an affirmative defense must prove it by a preponderance of the evidence, not clear and convincing evidence.
• Highlands Ins. Co. v. Strachan Shipping Co.
  772 F.2d 1520· 11th Cir.· 1985-10-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the TV sets were actually delivered in good order to the bailee, Strachan Shipping Co.
• Sch. Bd. OF the Cnty. OF Prince William v. Malone
  762 F.2d 1210· 4th Cir.· 1985-05-24 ·cited 8×
  Expulsion of a handicapped child is a change in educational placement that triggers the procedural protections of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA), and a determination must be made whether the child's behavior was caused by their handicap.
• Little v. Off. OF Pers. Mgmt.
  762 F.2d 962· Fed. Cir.· 1985-05-10 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Merit Systems Protection Board's decision denying a retirement annuity was supported by substantial evidence, as the petitioner failed to provide sufficient documentation to prove his actual duties met the statutory definition of a law enforcement officer.
• Mitchum v. Tenn. Valley Auth.
  756 F.2d 82· Fed. Cir.· 1985-02-27 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the agency's decision regarding the employee's offense, finding the board's reasoning, though cryptic, was not unreasonable.
• Shaindy Fenton & Shaindy Fenton, Inc. v. Freedman
  748 F.2d 1358· 9th Cir.· 1984-12-05 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court had subject matter jurisdiction, that appellants waived objections to deposition testimony by failing to seek a ruling, that the substitution of a corporate co-plaintiff was proper, and that the evidence did not establish an agency relations
• Dennis v. Joubert
  736 F.2d 191· 5th Cir.· 1984-07-12 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court was justified in finding the plaintiff responsible for the fires based on circumstantial evidence of financial motive and that the plaintiff's arguments regarding evidentiary rulings were without merit.
• United States v. Gonzalez
  736 F.2d 981· 4th Cir.· 1984-06-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial judge erred by failing to make a preliminary finding on the voluntariness of the defendant's incriminating statement before submitting it to the jury.
• Novotny v. Dep't of Transp.
  735 F.2d 521· Fed. Cir.· 1984-05-18 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the agency's procedures were lawful and its actions, including the failure to send materials, involved no harmful error, affirming the Board's decision to sustain the removal.
• Castaldo v. United States Parole Comm'n & George Rodgers
  725 F.2d 94· 10th Cir.· 1984-01-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Parole Commission adequately established good cause to exceed parole guidelines based on the magnitude of the offense and prior cocaine convictions, and that no impermissible double-counting occurred.
• Howze v. Marshall
  716 F.2d 396· 6th Cir.· 1983-09-09 ·cited 8×
  Placing the burden on a defendant to prove insanity by a preponderance of the evidence does not violate due process, provided the state proves all elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States v. Breit
  712 F.2d 81· 4th Cir.· 1983-07-12 ·cited 8×
  A defendant who knows of juror misconduct during trial but delays reporting it until after the verdict waives their right to a new trial.
• C & K Coal Co. v. United Mine Workers OF Am.
  704 F.2d 690· 3d Cir.· 1983-04-05 ·cited 8×
  The court held that unions could be liable for illegal secondary picketing under section 303, but attorneys' fees incurred in prior injunction actions were not recoverable damages. The court also affirmed the dismissal of state law claims, Sherman Act claims, and section 1985(3)
• United States v. Piccolo
  696 F.2d 1162· 6th Cir.· 1983-01-04 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the conspiracy conviction must be reversed due to a vague indictment and insufficient jury instructions that failed to connect the law to the specific facts of the case. The court also remanded for resentencing on the possession and distribution counts due to
• Thurston Henderson v. Jago
  681 F.2d 471· 6th Cir.· 1982-06-24 ·cited 8×
  Failure to comply with Ohio's Contemporaneous Objection Rule, absent sufficient cause for the default, bars a federal habeas corpus challenge to jury instructions.
• United States v. Magnuson
  680 F.2d 56· 8th Cir.· 1982-06-17 ·cited 8×
  The court held that guilty pleas waived objections to suppression motions, and that the trial court properly admitted evidence and imposed sentence.
• Bizzigotti v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n
  410 So. 2d 1360· Fla. 1st DCA· 1982-03-15 ·cited 8×
  Bizzigotti challenged the Florida Parole and Probation Commission's use of aggravating factors to extend his presumptive parole release date. The court reversed the dismissal of his mandamus petition, finding the Commission improperly penalized him for exercising his Fifth Amendm
• AGE v. Bullitt Cnty. Pub. Schs.
  673 F.2d 141· 6th Cir.· 1982-03-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not err in approving the proposed educational program for the handicapped child, finding it to be appropriate under the Act.
• Tipton v. Woodbury
  616 F.2d 170· 5th Cir.· 1980-04-30 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the letters confirming the oral agreement satisfied the Statute of Frauds and that sufficient evidence demonstrated the existence of a binding contract for the sale of stock, entitling the plaintiffs to specific performance.
• United States v. Morton
  591 F.2d 483· 8th Cir.· 1979-02-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not err in restricting cross-examination, refusing a mistrial, admitting co-conspirator statements, or in finding the evidence sufficient to support the conviction.
• Roth v. State
  359 So. 2d 881· Fla. 3d DCA· 1978-05-09 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed a conviction for first-degree murder, holding that statements made by the defendant during a pre-polygraph interview were admissible.
• Pelle v. Glantz
  349 So. 2d 732· Fla. 3d DCA· 1977-08-23 ·cited 8×·via Burden Of Proof By Preponderance Of The Evidence
  In this mortgage foreclosure dispute, the trial court found a mortgage executed by the Pelles to the Glantzs to be unenforceable due to lack of valid consideration and the mortgagor's unclean hands. The appellate court affirmed, finding substantial evidence supported the trial co
• Bright v. Taylor
  554 F.2d 854· 8th Cir.· 1977-05-04 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the district court's dismissal, finding no clear error in the factual findings regarding violations of union members' rights or fiduciary duties.
• Lewis Fagan, M.D. v. United States
  545 F.2d 1005· 5th Cir.· 1977-01-24 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims regarding tainted testimony and speedy trial violations were without merit, affirming the denial of his postconviction relief motion.
• United States ex rel. Ronald Burbank v. Warden, Ill. State Penitentiary
  535 F.2d 361· 7th Cir.· 1976-05-05 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the arresting officers had probable cause to arrest the petitioner based on witness descriptions and the arresting officer's personal knowledge of the neighborhood and its inhabitants. The court also held that the state trial court adequately determined the vo
• Embry-Riddle Aeronautical Univ. v. Ross Aviation, Inc.
  504 F.2d 896· 5th Cir.· 1974-12-02 ·cited 8×
  A union forfeits its antitrust exemption when it conspires with a non-labor group to restrain trade, even if the conspiracy involves only one employer and the union's actions are aimed at a successor employer.
• Pender v. Hatcher
  303 So. 2d 427· Fla. 2d DCA· 1974-11-27 ·cited 8×
  In this quiet title action, the appellant obtained a default judgment against his adoptive father and half sister based on constructive service, but the trial court vacated that judgment after finding the appellant committed extrinsic fraud by making false factual allegations in
• State v. Harris
  276 So. 2d 845· Fla. 4th DCA· 1973-04-17 ·cited 8×
  The State appeals a trial court's order suppressing a defendant's oral confession for being involuntary. The appellate court reversed and remanded because the trial judge applied an incorrect legal standard (clear and convincing evidence instead of preponderance of the evidence)
• United States v. Ashe
  478 F.2d 661· D.C. Cir.· 1973-03-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that it had jurisdiction to hear the appeal from the insanity verdict and subsequent commitment order, and that the trial court did not err in its conduct of the voir dire, expert testimony on dangerousness, or the standard of proof in the Bolton hearing.
• Bates v. Meadows
  358 F.2d 674· 6th Cir.· 1966-03-28 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that his guilty plea was not voluntarily and understandingly made.
• Gordon v. Burton F. Hubbard and Gaynard H. Fosdick
  347 F.2d 1001· C.C.P.A.· 1965-07-08 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the appellant failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he reduced the invention to practice prior to the senior party's filing date, as the tests performed did not sufficiently demonstrate the device's utility under intended operating conditions
• Waxler v. Waxler Towing Co., Inc.
  342 F.2d 746· 6th Cir.· 1965-01-29 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the jury charge, despite minor deficiencies, was not so prejudicial as to warrant reversal, especially given the lack of timely objection.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Tidelands Marine Serv., Inc.
  338 F.2d 44· 5th Cir.· 1964-11-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's findings of fact were supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole, and therefore, the Board's order should be enforced.
• Utley Wholesale Co. v. United States
  308 F.2d 157· 5th Cir.· 1962-09-13 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the tractor and trailer were subject to forfeiture as they were used in violation of internal revenue laws, but the seized sugar was not subject to forfeiture as it was not intended for illegal use.
• United States v. United Mktg. Ass'n
  291 F.2d 851· 8th Cir.· 1961-06-29 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment because genuine issues of material fact regarding the appellees' knowledge and good faith remained, which should have been resolved by a trial.