 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Belford v. J & J Plastering10/30/2002
o the jury."
Discussion
The four issues raised by Plaintiff on appeal center around either the admission of evidence (i.e. cross-examination of Plaintiff regarding his medical treatment, when he hired his attorney, and how he came to be treated by the chiropractor), or the exclusion of evidence and/or refusal to charge the jury regarding the wrecker and storage charges incurred by Plaintiff.
In relevant part, Rule 3(e) of the Tenn. R. App. P. provides as follows:
n all cases tried by a jury, no issue presented for review shall be predicated upon error in the admission or exclusion of evidence, jury instructions granted or refused, misconduct of jurors, parties or counsel, or other action committed or occurring during the trial of the case, or other ground upon which a new trial is sought, unless the same was specifically stated in a motion for a new trial; otherwise such issues will be treated as waived. Failure of an appellant to take any step other than the timely filing of a notice of appeal does not affect the validity of the appeal but is ground only for such action as the appellate court deems appropriate, which may include dismissal of the appeal. . . .
It is undisputed that Plaintiff did not file a motion for new trial raising these issues. Inasmuch as all issues raised by Plaintiff on appeal center around the admission or exclusion of evidence, pursuant to Tenn. R. App. P. 3(e), we deem these issues waived and dismiss this appeal. See generally Fahey v. Eldridge, 46 S.W.3d 138, 141 (Tenn. 2001)("It has long been the rule in this state that in order to preserve errors for appeal, the appellant must first bring the alleged errors to the attention of the trial court in a motion for a new trial.").
Conclusion
The judgment of the Trial Court is affirmed, and this cause is remanded to the Trial Court for such further proceedings as may be required, if any, consistent with this Opinion, and for collection of the costs below. The costs on appeal are assessed against the Appellant Steven R. Belford, and his surety.
|