ARISLEIDY RIVERS AND ANDY SORIA

v.

GANCEDO LUMBER CO., INC., ET AL.,

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Stripling v. State, 664 So. 2d 2, 3 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995) (rejecting claim of undue restriction on voir dire where error was unpreserved, as counsel “affirmatively accepted the jury . . . [and] did not renew his objection at that time or at any time prior to the swearing of the jury”); Samuels v. Luxury Imps. of Palm Beach, Inc., 930 So. 2d 760, 760-61 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (affirming where alleged errors concerned “the improper admission of evidence relating to . . . damages and improper argument . . . with respect to [them],” but they “were harmless, because the jury never reached the issue of damages, having found for [defendant] on the liability issues”); Zuniga v. Eisinger, 954 So. 2d 634, 636 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (trial court did not abuse discretion in action arising out of automobile accident by denying plaintiff’s motion for new trial on grounds of defense counsel’s unobjected-to statements in closing argument, where comments were not improper or incurable, and argument did not damage fairness of trial); see also London v. Dubrovin, 165 So. 3d 30, 32 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015) (“where individual claims of error fail, a related cumulative error claim must likewise fail”).