Cited by

(stating that we generally will not consider matters not argued to and considered by the district court); (stating that “litigants are bound [on appeal] by the theory or theories, however erroneous or improvident, upon which the action was actually

App. P. 110.01 (stating that the record on appeal is limited to the exhibits, transcripts, and documents filed in the district court); (stating that “[a]n 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”).

We recognize that “[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, d 680, 696 (Minn. App. 2024) (applying Thiele in a juvenile-protection context), rev. denied (Minn. July 19, 2024).

-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.”).

(stating that appellate courts generally address only those issues presented to and considered by the district court); State, Dep’t of Labor & Indus.

“An appellate court ordinarily may not consider matters outside the record.” Thomas A. Foster & Assocs., (– 83 (Minn. 1988)).

See In re Application of Otter Tail Power Co. , n.5 (Minn. 2020) (noting that an appellant may not raise an issue for the first time in a reply brief); (concluding that a reviewing court may only consider issues that were presented to and considered by the district court).

31 matter before it.” (), aff’d, d 178 (Minn. 2024); (discussing the Thiele forfeiture analysis in the context of a certiorari appeal).

(stating that reviewing court generally will consider only issues raised and considered below); (applying Thiele in certiorari appeal).

(noting appellate courts only consider those issues argued before and considered by the district court).

(declining to consider issues that the record shows were not presented to and considered by the district court).

12 same general issue litigated below but under a different theory.”

(stating that a party may not “obtain review by raising the same general issue litigated [at the district court] but under a different theory”).

“Generally, a reviewing court will consider only those issues that were presented to and considered by the district court.” d 640, 652 (Minn. App. 2025) (), rev. denied (Minn. June 25, 2025).

“An appellate court ordinarily may not consider matters outside the record.” Thomas A. Foster & Assocs., (– 83 (Minn. 1988)).

(stating that a party may not “obtain review by raising the same general issue litigated below but under a different theory”).

(stating that appellate courts “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)).

(stating that 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)); (explaining that inadequately briefed arguments ar

“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.” -83 (Minn. 1988).

-42 (Minn. 2011) (analyzing whether interests-of-justice exception was properly before its court for consideration and analyzing merits of the claim); Thiele v. Stich , ( “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)); (citing Thiele in a criminal case).

B ut because the district court considered and decided that the lease was unambiguous and that extrinsic evidence regarding tenants’ communications with Renters Warehouse therefore could not be considered, (“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)).

“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.” -83 (Minn. 1988).

(d 580, 582 (Minn. 1988)) (declining to review issues not raised before the ULJ), rev. denied (Minn. June 21, 2022).

(“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); Morehouse v. Comm’r of Pub.

“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.” ( Nonprecedential opinions in this opinion are cited for their persuasive value.

(stating that appellate courts 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)).

–83 (Minn. 1988); see also Minn. R. Civ.

Moreover, because the road association did not assert any associational injury before the district court, (stating that an appellate court’s review is generally limited to those issues presented to, and considered by, the district court).

Generally, we do not consider an issue raised for the first time on appeal; “[n]or may a party obtain review by raising the same general issue litigated below but under a different theory.” (quoting this aspect of Thiele).