Case Name: Mark GAUVAIN, Appellant, v. Arlene WARDWELL, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1996-04-17
Citations: 686 So. 2d 10
Docket Number: No. 94-03022
Parties: Mark GAUVAIN, Appellant, v. Arlene WARDWELL, Appellee.
Judges: SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and FULMER and QUINCE, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 686
Pages: 10–11

Head Matter:
Mark GAUVAIN, Appellant, v. Arlene WARDWELL, Appellee.
No. 94-03022.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
April 17, 1996.
Rehearing Denied May 17, 1996.
Marvin Weinstein of Grover, Weinstein, Stauber & Friedman, P.A, Miami Beach, for Appellant.
Bonita L. Kneeland of Fowler, White, Gil-len, Boggs, Villareal & Banker, P.A., Tampa, for Appellee, Wardwell.
Jack W. Shaw, Jr., of Brown, Obringer, Shaw, Beardsley & Decandio, P.A., Jacksonville, for amicus curiae, Florida Defense Lawyers Association.
Sean C. Domniek of Ford, Domnick & Wolf, P.A., Miami, for amicus curiae, The Academy of Florida Trial Lawyers.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Mark Gauvain, the plaintiff in a personal injury action, appeals the final judgment entered after jury verdict and the trial court order denying his motion for new trial. We affirm.
Gauvain presents four issues on appeal. We do not address the two issues pertaining to the seatbelt defense because the argument presented on appeal was not timely presented to the trial court. Furthermore, Gau-vain's counsel stipulated to the jury instructions and verdict form that were given to the jury. Therefore, these issues were not preserved for appellate review. See City of Orlando v. Birmingham, 539 So.2d 1133 (Fla.1989). With respect to the remaining two issues, we find them to be without merit.
Affirmed.
SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and FULMER and QUINCE, JJ., concur.