MOTOR WERKS, LLC
v.
MOTO WERKS, LLC

Fla. 5th DCA | 2020-03-27
No. 19-2252
Roberts, J., Orfinger, J., Cohen, J., Eisnaugle, J.
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2020)

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.


Holding

An issue is not preserved for appeal unless it is presented to the trial court with the specific legal argument or ground to be argued on appeal.


Headnotes

[1] An issue is not preserved for appellate review unless it is presented to the trial court with the specific legal argument or ground intended to be raised on appeal.

Previewing 1 of 1 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

Key Quotes

“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.”

Court citing Sunset Harbour Condo. Ass'n v. Robbins, 914 So. 2d 925, 928 (Fla. 2005)

Facts & Procedural History

Motor Werks appealed a trial court's amended order requiring it to pay arrears to Moto Werks. Motor Werks argued on appeal that Moto Werks recovered t…

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.

Opinion of the Court
Eisnaugle

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

MOTOR WERKS, LLC,

Appellant,

v. Case No. 5D19-2252

MOTO WERKS, LLC,

Appellee.

________________________________/

Opinion filed March 27, 2020

Nonfinal Appeal from the Circuit Court for Brevard County, Charles J. Roberts, Judge.

David A. Baker and Mark A. Cavins, of Law Office of David A. Baker, P.A., Rockledge, for Appellant.

Charles Allen Schillinger, of Schillinger & Coleman, P.A., Melbourne, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Motor Werks, LLC (“Motor”), appeals the trial court’s amended order requiring it to pay arrears to Moto Werks, LLC (“MWerks”). On appeal, Motor argues that MWerks recovered twice for the same debt. Following a review of the record, we conclude that Motor failed to present that argument below. Thus, this issue is not preserved for appeal. 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

AFFIRMED.

ORFINGER, COHEN and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur.

Footnotes
2 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))).

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw