JUAN WHIPPLE
v.
CRYSTAL F. DAWSON
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
An issue is not preserved for appellate review unless it was presented to the trial court with the specific legal argument or ground to be argued on appeal.
[1] An issue is not preserved for appellate review unless the specific legal argument or ground to be argued on appeal is presented to the trial court as part of the initial…
[2] The burden is on the appellant to provide an adequate record to support an appeal and to demonstrate error in the trial court's decision.
Previewing 2 of 2 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“In order to be preserved for further review by a higher court, an issue must be presented to the lower court and the specific legal argument or ground to be argued on appeal or review must be part of that presentation if it is to be considered preserved.”
The court's statement of the preservation of issues requirement, citing Sunset Harbour Condo. Ass'n v. Robbins.
The case involves an appeal by Juan Whipple against Crystal F. Dawson. The specific facts are not detailed in this per curiam opinion.…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Adequate Record On Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Sunset Harbour Condo. Ass’n v. Robbins, 914 So. 2d 925, 928 (Fla. 2005) (“In order to be preserved for further review by a higher court, an issue must be presented to the lower court and the specific legal argument or ground to be argued on appeal or review must be part of that presentation if it is to be considered preserved.” (quoting Tillman v. State, 471 So. 2d 32, 35 (Fla.1985))); Rose v. Clements, 973 So. 2d 529, 530 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007) (“Any basis for reversal of summary judgment must be preserved by raising the issue in the trial court.”); Rose v. Hansell, 929 So. 2d 22, 24 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) (explaining that appellant is “required to provide an adequate record to support his appeal, and it is his burden to demonstrate error”).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Tillman v. State, 471 So. 2d 32 (Fla. 1985)
- Sunset Harbour Condo. Ass'n v. Robbins, 914 So. 2d 925 (Fla. 2005)
- Rose v. Clements, 973 So. 2d 529 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007)
- Rose v. Hansell, 929 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)