observing that the abuse-of-discretion standard also “protects to a limited degree the trial court’s ‘right’ to be wrong without suffering appellate revision” when the trial court’s error is not prejudicial or does not result in injury
How later courts described this case
- observing that the abuse-of-discretion standard also “protects to a limited degree the trial court’s ‘right’ to be wrong without suffering appellate revision” when the trial court’s error is not prejudicial or does not result in injury
- one factor to determine whether abuse of discretion has occurred is whether the appellate record reveals sufficient facts upon which the trial court could act rationally in an exercise of its discretion
- “The better practice would have been for the trial court to state in the record its reasoning so that the parties particularly, but also the appellate court, might intelligently assess whether the trial court erred----”
- describing ways in which a court can abuse its discretion
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
ABOUSSIE, Judge,
concurring.
I concur in this Court’s judgment. The trial court, however, should not be required to explain its reasoning and decision-making process in reaching a result each time it exercises its discretion, or else that authority is erroded.