Cited by

See, (stating that appellate courts address only those questions previously presented to and considered by the district court); State, Dep’t of Lab.

Assocs., (“[A]n undecided question is not usually amenable to appellate review.”); (“[A] party [may not] obtain review by raising the same general issue litigated below but under a different theory.”).

(stating that an appellate court must generally limit its review to issues presented to and considered by the district court).

“A reviewing court must generally consider only those issues that the record shows were presented and considered by the trial court in deciding the matter before it.” (quotation omitted); see also Peterson v. Ne.

(“Nor may a party obtain 7 review by raising the same general issue litigated below but under a different theory.”).

(declining to review an issue that was not properly preserved in district court) .

(stating that appellate courts generally address only those questions previously presented to and considered by the district court).

We do not consider this argument because a party cannot raise a new issue on appeal or “obtain review by raising the same general issue litigated below but under a different theory.”

“A reviewing court must gene rally consider only those issues that the record shows were presented and considered by the trial court in deciding the matter before it.” (quotation omitted).

(“A reviewing court must generally consider only those issues that the record shows were presented [to] and considered by the trial court in deciding the matter before it.” (quotation omitted)).

This court considers “only those issues that the record shows were presented and considered by the trial court in deciding the matter before it.” d 580, 582 (Minn. 1988).

may not consider matters not produced and received in evidence below.” –83 (Minn. 1988).

n.2 (Minn. App. 2019) (“[W]e note that a party challenging the constitutionality of a statute must give notice to the Minnesota Attorney General .

(stating that appellate courts generally address only those questions previously presented to and considered by the district court).

See Thiele v. Stich , (stating that appellate courts generally must consider only the issues that the record shows were presented to and considered by the district court in deciding the matter before it.)

Regarding the journal articles Smith cites, we note that “[a]n appellate court may not base its decision on matters outside the record on appeal.” Thiele v. Stich , -83 (Minn. 1988).

(noting that appellate courts generally address only those questions previously presented to and considered by the district court).

upon which the action was actually tried below.”); (explaining that appellate courts generally do not consider matters not argued to and considered by the district court).

(declining to review an argument that was not considered and decided by the district court); see also In re Civ.

Generally, appellate courts only consider “issues that the record shows were presented and considered by the trial court.” (quotation omitted).

Rose Cliff Landscape Nursery, (stating a challenge to a zoning ordinance, not presented to the district court, “will not be considered for the first time on appeal”); (an appellate court will not consider matters not argued to and considered by the district court).