COSID, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
BAY STEEL PRODUCTS CO., INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Appellate Review Limitations cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We have examined the briefs and record on appeal and heard oral argument and on the basis thereof we are of the view that no reversible error has been demonstrated. In particular, the appellant’s contention regarding the raising of an affirmative defense in a motion for summary judgment is not properly before this court for appellate consideration inasmuch as it was never raised by the complainant in the proceedings before the trial court. Except in the case of fundamental error a point not raised and determined in the court below cannot be raised for the first time on appeal; an appellate court must confine itself to a consideration of only those matters in question that were before the lower court. 2 Fla.Jur. Appeals § 290. Moreover, the record suggests that the appellant consented to the manner of the proceedings below and should not now be heard to complain. There being no merit to any other contention raised by the appellant the order of the trial court is affirmed.
CROSS, MAGER and DOWNEY, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Rosa v. Ortega, 392 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)…ssue to the trial court for a determination on the merits on motion for summary judgment. Accordingly, appellant cannot raise the issue of GMC’s failure to deny her allegations of agency for the first time on appeal. Cosid v. Bay Steel Products Co., 288 So. 2d 277 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974). Appellant’s next contention is that the dealer franchise agreement between South Bay and GMC gave GMC the right to control South Bay’s methods of operation to such an extent that a jury question was presented as to whether Sout…
-
Wildwood Props., Inc. v. Archer OF Vero Beach, Inc., 621 So. 2d 691 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)…ing of summary judgment on appellant’s lien foreclosure against appellee, we affirm because the grounds now raised were not brought to the attention of the trial court in opposition to the summary judgment. See Cosid, Inc. v. Bay Steel Products Co., 288 So. 2d 277 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974) (argument regarding [*693] the propriety of raising of affirmative defenses by way of summary judgment motion not properly before the court as no objection had been made at the trial court); Marks v. Delcastillo, 386 So. 2d 1259…
-
Nicholas v. First Interstate Dev. Corp., 315 So. 2d 238 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975)…the court below and not to permit the presentation of points, grounds or objections for the first time in the appellate court. 2 Fla.Jur., Appeals, Sec 290; also Wyrembek v. Frey, Fla.App., 231 So. 2d 222; Cosid v. Bay Steel Products Co., Fla.App., 288 So. 2d 277; Palmer v. Thomas, Fla.App., 284 So. 2d 709. Nor can the record void be cured by the court taking judicial notice of any amended ordinance. The established rule is to the contrary. Haverty v. State of Florida, Fla.App., 258 So. 2d 18; Conrad v. Jac…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence