Opinion ID: 2582628
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Board's Tie Vote

Text: McMullen's first argument is that the board incorrectly concluded that its tie vote affirmed the administrator's original decision. He argues that the effect of the board's tie vote is not to affirm the administrator's original decision against him, but rather to affirm the board's first decision  reviewing the administrator's decision  which reversed the administrator and ruled in McMullen's favor. McMullen did not raise this point before the board, argue it before the superior court, or list it in his points on appeal. The administrator argues that McMullen has therefore waived this argument. Ordinarily this court will not consider an issue raised for the first time on appeal. [11] The only exception is where the issue is 1) not dependent on any new or controverted facts; 2) closely related to the appellant's trial court arguments; and 3) could have been gleaned from the pleadings. [12] Although McMullen's argument is not dependent on any new or controverted facts, it is not closely related to the trial court arguments, and it could not have been gleaned from any of the earlier proceedings. As a result, it does not qualify for an exception to the waiver rule. We decline to consider this argument.