Cited by

(stating that, generally, ap pellate courts address only issues previ ously presented to and consider ed by the district court).

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 omit ted)).

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

See T hiele v. Stich , , 582 (Minn. 1988) (stating that a ppellate courts generally will not consider matters not argued 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 [district] court in deciding the matter before it.” (quotation omitted); see also Watson v. United S ervs.

See Thiele v. Stich , (stating appellate court s generally 8 address only issues presented to and considered by the district court).3 We address each of these arguments in turn, and we begin with equal protection.

-83 (Minn. 1988) (“An appellate court may not base its decision on matters outside the record on appeal, and may not consider matters not produced and received in evidence below.”).

Because Fredin’s argument was neither adequately brief ed, nor raised below, it is not properly before us. 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.” (quotation omitted)); see also State Dep’t of Labor & 8 Indus.

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

29, 1989); see also Thiele v. Stich

“A reviewing court must generally consider only those issues that the record shows were presented and considered by the trial court.” (quotation omitted).

24, 2001); (noting that appellate courts generally address only those questions previously presented to and considered by the district court).

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

(stating that an appellate court will not consider matters not argued to and considered by the district court); Peterson v. Ne.

11 trial) (citing Thiele v. Stich , (Minn .

We are limited to considering “only those issues that t he record shows were presented [to] and considered by the trial court in deciding the matter before it.” (quotation omitted).

Appellants’ argument that their letters constitute statutory notices of cancellation therefore is not properly before us.5 (stating that appellate courts generally do not consider issues that were not presented to and decided by the district court).

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

Citizen, 541 U.S. 7 52, 764-65, 124 S. Ct. 2204, 2214 (2004) (holding that issues not raised to agency in environmental-review proceedings are forfeited); (stating that generally an appellate court will not consider matters not argued to or considered by the district court); Hentges v. Minn. Bd.

(holding that, generally, an appellate court will consider only matters argued to and considered by the district court); (holding that an alleged defect in district court findings not brought to the attention of the district court cannot b

Doe 175 v. Columbia Heights Sch.

Generally, “litigants are bound [on appeal] by the theory or theories, however erroneous or improvident, upon which the action was act ually tried below[,]” and an appellate court gener ally will not consider matters not argued to and considered by the district court

(attempted service ineffective when papers were not served personally on defendant but were left with receptionist at defendant’s office).

O ur decision in Hagen that the 25% parenting - that we generally do not consider m atters not argued to and considered by the district court.

A party may not “obtain review by raising the same gene ral issue litigated below but under a different theory.” Thiele v. Stich

(“A reviewing court must generally consider only those issues that the record shows were presented and considered by the [district] court .

2 In assigning error, he cites Thiele v. Stich , and State v. Morse

See, - 83 (Minn. 1988) (declining to consider matters not argued to and considered by the district court); In re A.D.

d 580, 582 (Minn. 1988).

See Thiele v. Stich , , 582 (Minn. 1988) ("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."