Why This Website
Stutz Artiano Shinoff
& Holtz v. Maura
Larkins defamation
List of lawyers
List of school districts
SDCOE
CVESD
Castle Park
Elementary School
Law Enforcement
CTA
CVE
Stutz Artiano Shinoff
& Holtz
Silence is Golden
Schools and Violence
Office Admin Hearings
Larkins OAH Hearing
Stutz Artiano Shinoff
& Holtz v. Maura
Larkins defamation
List of lawyers
List of school districts
SDCOE
CVESD
Castle Park
Elementary School
Law Enforcement
CTA
CVE
Stutz Artiano Shinoff
& Holtz
Silence is Golden
Schools and Violence
Office Admin Hearings
Larkins OAH Hearing
| San Diego Education Report |
| SDER |
San Diego
Education Report
Education Report
| SDER |
| SDER |
| SDER |
United States v. Hinkson, case no. 05-30303 (9th Cir. Nov. 5, 2009) “…Today, after
review of our cases and relevant Supreme Court precedent, we re-state the “abuse of
discretion” standard of review of a trial court’s factual findings as an objective two-part
test. As discussed below, our newly stated “abuse of discretion” test requires us first to
consider whether the district court identified the correct legal standard for decision of
the issue before it. Second, the test then requires us to determine whether the district
court’s findings of fact, and its application of those findings of fact to the correct legal
standard, were illogical, implausible, or without support in inferences that may be drawn
from facts in the record…detailed formulations of the abuse of discretion standard tend
to incorporate multiple standards of review, each of which is applied to a discrete step
in a multiple-step analysis as to whether the trial court abused its discretion.
review of our cases and relevant Supreme Court precedent, we re-state the “abuse of
discretion” standard of review of a trial court’s factual findings as an objective two-part
test. As discussed below, our newly stated “abuse of discretion” test requires us first to
consider whether the district court identified the correct legal standard for decision of
the issue before it. Second, the test then requires us to determine whether the district
court’s findings of fact, and its application of those findings of fact to the correct legal
standard, were illogical, implausible, or without support in inferences that may be drawn
from facts in the record…detailed formulations of the abuse of discretion standard tend
to incorporate multiple standards of review, each of which is applied to a discrete step
in a multiple-step analysis as to whether the trial court abused its discretion.
Standard of review