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

• Lutheran Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. United States
  816 F.2d 376· 8th Cir.· 1987-04-06 ·cited 2×
  A life insurance company can deduct a portion of state income taxes paid as a general expense allocable to investment income, but cannot deduct expenses for servicing policy loans based on an unreliable survey.
• Wolf Krahmer and Herta C. Krahmer v. The United States
  810 F.2d 1145· Fed. Cir.· 1987-02-04 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the mere existence of a forged signature on a painting does not automatically entitle a taxpayer to a theft loss deduction; intent to defraud must be proven. The court affirmed the denial of a theft loss deduction for the Poussin painting and reversed the allo
• Dennis v. Dep't OF Health & Human Servs.
  804 F.2d 670· Fed. Cir.· 1986-11-04 ·cited 2×·via Burden Of Proof By Preponderance Of The Evidence
  The court held that the arbitrator's decision sustaining the agency's removal of the employee was not supported by substantial evidence because the remaining evidence did not rebut the employee's explanation for the errors.
• Hill v. Elconnie Jackson
  497 So. 2d 688· Fla. 1st DCA· 1986-10-29 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the mother's testimony regarding sexual relations with the appellee during the conception period, combined with a 99.99% probability of paternity from an HLA test, was sufficient to establish paternity.
• Turlington v. Ferris
  496 So. 2d 177· Fla. 1st DCA· 1986-10-02 ·cited 2×
  The Commissioner of Education appealed the dismissal of an administrative complaint against a teacher charged with sexual misconduct involving a minor. The court reversed, finding the hearing officer applied an incorrect legal standard by requiring corroboration of the victim's t
• United States v. McLEAN-Davis
  795 F.2d 957· 11th Cir.· 1986-08-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Middle District of Florida was a proper venue for the Travel Act charge because sufficient contacts existed to establish venue, and there was no fundamental variance between the indictment and the proof.
• United States v. Lujan
  796 F.2d 96· 5th Cir.· 1986-08-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that there was sufficient independent evidence of a conspiracy to justify the admission of co-conspirator statements and sufficient evidence to support the conviction for conspiracy.
• Barnett v. State
  483 So. 2d 63· Fla. 2d DCA· 1986-01-31 ·cited 2×
  Pauline Barnett challenges a forfeiture order of $16,250 that she claimed she loaned to her sons to purchase a tractor-trailer. The court reversed the forfeiture, holding that the trial court erred by not allowing the state to present witness testimony before ordering forfeiture,
• Page v. The Franklin Cnty. Sch. Bd.
  481 So. 2d 43· Fla. 1st DCA· 1985-12-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the jury instruction and verdict form were erroneous because they required plaintiffs to prove each board member had an impermissible motive, rather than just that the protected conduct was a substantial or motivating factor in the collective decision.
• Bulloch v. Pearson
  768 F.2d 1191· 10th Cir.· 1985-07-26 ·cited 2×
  Plaintiffs are collaterally estopped from relitigating the issue of fraud on the court, as it is a prerequisite to their due process claim and was decided in a prior case under the same standard of proof.
• In the Interest of S.C. v. State
  471 So. 2d 1326· Fla. 1st DCA· 1985-06-25 ·cited 2×
  Parents appealed an adjudication that their child S.C. was dependent and should be placed in foster care. The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed, holding that evidence of the parents' past abuse and neglect of their other children was relevant and admissible in determining
• State v. Wilson
  466 So. 2d 1152· Fla. 2d DCA· 1985-03-27 ·cited 2×
  Florida appeals a trial court's in limine order excluding coconspirator hearsay testimony in a first-degree murder prosecution. The appellate court reverses, holding that substantial independent evidence of a conspiracy and the defendants' participation was established, making co
• In re the Est. OF Irene M. Brumage v. Arne A. Kivi
  460 So. 2d 989· Fla. 4th DCA· 1984-12-19 ·cited 2×
  A person found not guilty by reason of insanity for a decedent's death may still be barred from receiving nonprobate assets if a civil proceeding establishes by a preponderance of the evidence that the killing was intentional and unlawful.
• United States v. Lambert
  589 F. Supp. 366· M.D. Fla.· 1984-06-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendant's filling operations in wetlands adjacent to navigable waters violated the Clean Water Act, but ordered restoration only for the western wetland, deeming it not unduly burdensome and environmentally beneficial.
• van Hook v. AETNA Life & Cas.
  728 F.2d 333· 6th Cir.· 1984-02-24 ·cited 2×
  The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding no clear error in the factual determinations regarding the cause of death.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Townsend & Bottum, Inc.
  722 F.2d 297· 6th Cir.· 1983-12-02 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Board's order should not be enforced because the Administrative Law Judge failed to make a finding by a preponderance of the evidence that the employer's actions were motivated by anti-union animus.
• Wall St. W., Inc. v. Abbruzzese
  718 F.2d 973· 10th Cir.· 1983-10-12 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the SEC's order, holding that the misleading stationery used by a branch office violated NASD rules and that the supervisory failures constituted a violation, even without proof of actual customer confusion or intent to deceive.
• Riley T. Kelly and Annette A. Kelly v. Commercial Union Ins. Co.
  709 F.2d 973· 5th Cir.· 1983-07-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the defendant's motion to dismiss for failure to join indispensable parties, in refusing to limit liability based on other insurance proceeds, or in denying the motion to reopen evidence.
• Sanchez-Martinez v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  714 F.2d 72· 9th Cir.· 1983-06-13 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the district court's determination that Sanchez-Martinez is not a U.S. citizen, finding the district court's factual findings were not clearly erroneous.
• Reynolds v. Sch. Bd. OF Flagler Cnty.
  417 So. 2d 277· Fla. 5th DCA· 1982-07-07 ·cited 2×
• Brown v. Warden, Great Meadow Correctional Facility
  682 F.2d 348· 2d Cir.· 1982-06-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that New York's requirement for the prosecution to prove a defendant's mental competency to stand trial by a preponderance of the evidence satisfies due process.
• Fed. Food Serv., Inc. v. The Honorable Raymond J. Donovan
  658 F.2d 830· D.C. Cir.· 1981-03-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Secretary of Labor's decision to debar appellants was arbitrary because it relied on an unsupported finding of improper management for de minimis underpayments, failing to properly apply the 'unusual circumstances' standard.
• United States v. Ochoa-Almanza
  623 F.2d 676· 10th Cir.· 1980-06-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the government failed to prove valid consent for a warrantless entry and search of the premises.
• Ozella Robinson v. Warrene H. Brunson
  383 So. 2d 964· Fla. 2d DCA· 1980-05-21 ·cited 2×
  Robinson sued the estate of John Thomas Brunson, Sr. for payment of a $4,500 promissory note. The trial court found for the defendant estate, but the appellate court reversed, holding that Robinson's failure to present an undated check given with the note did not discharge the un
• Bing v. Ocala Cleat Co.
  383 So. 2d 709· Fla. 1st DCA· 1980-05-01 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the judge of industrial claims erred in finding the claimant mentally competent, as this finding was contrary to the overwhelming preponderance of the evidence.
• Jensen v. Sohler
  601 F.2d 353· 8th Cir.· 1979-06-29 ·cited 2×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence from which a jury could infer intentional misrepresentation, even without direct proof.
• Firemen's Fund Am. Life Ins. Co. v. Wohl
  334 So. 2d 261· Fla. 3d DCA· 1976-04-27 ·cited 2×
  Firemen's Fund appeals a $50,000 jury verdict awarding life insurance proceeds to the widow of Jack Wohl based on his presumed death following the disappearance of a fishing vessel. The court upholds the verdict, finding sufficient circumstantial evidence that Wohl died in the lo
• Hill v. Lockhart
  516 F.2d 910· 8th Cir.· 1975-06-03 ·cited 2×
  The court held that requiring a defendant to prove insanity by a preponderance of the evidence as an affirmative defense does not violate due process, provided the prosecution proves all elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Marshall Exports, Inc. v. Phillips
  507 F.2d 47· 4th Cir.· 1974-12-03 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish that the defendant foreign corporation's activities fell within the scope of North Carolina's long-arm statutes, thus personal jurisdiction was not obtained.
• Carnley v. Wilson
  300 So. 2d 291· Fla. 4th DCA· 1974-09-20 ·cited 2×
• Breen v. Henshaw
  472 F.2d 1398· C.C.P.A.· 1973-02-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellants failed to establish actual reduction to practice of the claimed process by a preponderance of the evidence, affirming the Board of Patent Interferences' decision.
• Phillips v. Hocker
  473 F.2d 395· 9th Cir.· 1973-01-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that Nevada's rule placing the burden of proving insanity on the defendant does not violate the Due Process Clause, and a potentially erroneous jury instruction regarding the burden of proof for mitigation was harmless error given the other instructions.
• Diaz v. Se. Drilling Corp. OF Argentina, S.A.
  449 F.2d 258· 5th Cir.· 1971-09-17 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court correctly applied Argentine law to determine the validity of assignments and that excluded testimony was inadmissible hearsay. The court affirmed the district court's judgment.
• United States v. Wertz
  447 F.2d 451· 9th Cir.· 1971-08-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the prosecutor's argument regarding cross-examination was ambiguous and the jury instruction on the burden of proof was erroneous, warranting reversal.
• Livia C. Schmierer and Jacques H. F. Valin v. Newton
  397 F.2d 1010· C.C.P.A.· 1968-06-27 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the Board of Patent Interferences' decision awarding priority of invention to the junior party, Newton, finding sufficient evidence of conception, reduction to practice, and diligence.
• Captains Table, Inc. v. Khouri
  208 So. 2d 677· Fla. 4th DCA· 1968-04-10 ·cited 2×
  Captain's Table, Inc. sued Albert Khouri for payment for carpet installation work and materials. Khouri appealed a judgment against him, challenging the trial court's striking of his affirmative defense of failure of consideration and the rejection of his counterclaim based on al
• Lawrence v. Gulf OIL Corp.
  375 F.2d 427· 3d Cir.· 1967-04-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial judge committed reversible error by failing to instruct the jury that the plaintiff bore the burden of proof on the issue of assault.
• Clift v. United States
  350 F.2d 308· 5th Cir.· 1965-08-17 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the circumstantial evidence supported the district court's finding that the sugar was intended for use in violation of internal revenue laws, justifying forfeiture.
• Willens v. Breen
  343 F.2d 477· C.C.P.A.· 1965-04-15 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the Board of Patent Interferences' decision awarding priority of invention to Breen and Sussman, finding they had established actual reduction to practice.
• Quintero v. Sinclair Ref. Co.
  311 F.2d 217· 5th Cir.· 1962-12-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the submission of an 'unavoidable accident' interrogatory and the jury charge on the burden of proof did not constitute reversible error.
• W. M. & A. Transit Co. v. Radecka
  302 F.2d 921· D.C. Cir.· 1962-02-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in denying motions for directed verdict and judgment n.o.v., nor in admitting rebuttal and expert testimony, and that supplemental jury instructions were not misleading.
• YEE Tung GAY v. Rusk
  290 F.2d 630· 9th Cir.· 1961-05-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellants failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that they were the blood sons of the alleged father, rendering other claims of citizenship immaterial.
• Burt v. United States
  283 F.2d 473· 5th Cir.· 1960-11-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the government failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the automobile was used in transporting materials for an illicit distillery.
• de Vargas v. Brownell
  251 F.2d 869· 5th Cir.· 1958-01-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellant failed to meet her burden of proving U.S. citizenship by a preponderance of the evidence and that the trial court did not err in its rulings.
• Chow Sing v. Brownell
  235 F.2d 602· 9th Cir.· 1956-06-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the District Court did not err in finding that the appellant failed to meet the burden of proof to establish his claim of citizenship as the son of an American citizen, even when applying the ordinary civil burden of proof.
• Hickey v. Bd. of Dental Exam'rs
  10 Fla. Supp. 12· Dade Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1955-12-05 ·cited 2×
  A dentist challenged the Board of Dental Examiners' three-year license suspension for unlicensed practice violations, arguing the board applied the wrong standard of proof. The court held that license revocation cases require clear, positive, and unequivocal proof beyond reasonab
• Roensch v. Billner
  212 F.2d 193· C.C.P.A.· 1954-04-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Board of Interference Examiners correctly awarded priority of invention to the appellee, as the appellant failed to demonstrate conception of the invention prior to collaborating with the appellee.
• Barone v. Williams
  199 F.2d 189· D.C. Cir.· 1952-07-17 ·cited 2×
• Buford v. Cleveland & Buffalo S.S. Co.
  192 F.2d 196· 7th Cir.· 1951-10-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court's findings of negligence were clearly against the preponderance of the evidence and clearly erroneous, as the libelant failed to prove negligence proximately causing her injury.
• Diamond v. Woodyard
  186 F.2d 729· C.C.P.A.· 1951-01-16 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the Board of Interference Examiners' decision, awarding priority of invention to the junior party (appellees) for thermal tuning of klystrons.