Cited by

(stating that appellate courts generally 6 will not consider matters not argued to and considered by the district court); Hentges v. Minn. Bd.

(stating that an appellate court will generally not consider matters not presented to and considered by the district court).

(holding appellate courts “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)).

Generally, a reviewing court “will not address constitutional issues that were not raised before the district court.” D.F., d at 97; (declining to address issues raised for the first time on appellate review).

1 Ali also argues for the first time on appeal that law enforcement “unlawfully expanded the traffic stop of the vehicle Mr. Ali was driving to a warrantless, no-consent unlawful search.” Because “[a] reviewin g 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,” (M inn.

Genera lly, this court “may not consider matters not produced and received in evidence below.” Thiele v. Stich , -83 (Minn. 1988).

(indicating that courts need not address questions raised b ut “not passed on by the [district] court” (quotat ion omitted)).

d 580, 582 -83 (Minn. 1988).

(applying this aspect of Thiele in a juvenile-protection appeal).

See Thiele v. Stich , Aljubailah on behalf of A. M. J. v. James , d 638, 643 (Minn. App. 2017) (applying Thiele in affirming a district court’s grant of an OFP).

(“A reviewing court must generally consider ‘only those issues that the dispose of the estate property in a manner “consistent with the best interests of the estate.” Minn. Stat. § 524.3-703(a).

(“Time limits on appeals are jurisdictional.”) Because of this, and because appellate courts generally will not consider issues raised for the first time on appeal, we decline to address Carlson’s argument that the drainage authority’ s 2016 repair order violated the statutory requirements for a repair proceeding.

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

The moving party has the burden to “demonstrate no genuine issue of material fact exists.”

(stating that only those issues presented and considered by the district court may be considered on appeal).

3 Finally, appellants argue that “provisions in consumer contracts that are contrary to the representations or practices of the seller cannot serve as defenses to consumer fraud claims.” Respondent asserts that this argument was never raised to the district court and is therefore not properly before this court, and appellants do not oppose this assertion in their reply brief.

(stating that appellate review is limited to issues presented to and decided by the district court).

Accordingly, (“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)).

In reviewing a district court’s decision, the court of appeals “must generally consider only those issues that the record shows were presented and considered by the trial court in deciding the matter before it.”

Thiele v. Stich , d 580, 582 (Minn. 1988).

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

address the question of potential unfair prejudice, the issue is not properly before us. See Thiele v. Stich , (explaining that an appellate court “must generally consider only those issues that the record shows were presented and considered by the [district] court in deciding the matter before it” (quotation omitted)).

e Orders.” The governor responds that appellants’ argument regarding the imposition of criminal penalties is not properly before this court because it was not raised or addressed in district court.1 “A reviewing court must generally consider only those issues that the record shows were presented and considered by the [district] court in d eciding the matter before it.” (quotation omitted ).

(declining to consider a question raised below “if it was not passed on by the” factfinder (quotation omitted)); Peterson v. Ne.

Mother brought a motion to increase her parenting time, and father’s appeal was taken from the district court’s grant of that motion; the issue of restricting mother’s (declining to consider matters not argued to and considered by the district court).

(applying Thiele in a TPR appeal).

See Thiele v. Stich , (explaining that appellate courts generally will not consider new issues on appeal).

Litigants are generally bound on appeal by the theory on which the action was actually tried below, Annis v. Annis , 1 (Minn. 1957), and an appellate court generally will not consider matters not argue d to and considered by the district court, Thiele v. Stich

See Thiele v. Stich , (Mi nn.