cert. denied, 476 U.S. 1159, 106 S.Ct. 2279, 90 L.Ed.2d 721 (1986)). 44 . Reliance Steel & Aluminum Co. v. Sevcik, 267 S.W.3d 867, 871 (Tex.2008). 45 . Interstate Northborough P’ship v. State, 66 S.W.3d 213, 220 (Tex.2001) (op. on reh'g); City of Brownsville v. Alvarado, 897 S.W.2d 750, 753-54 (Tex.1995). 46 . State v. Cent. Expressway Sign Assocs., 302 S.W.3d 866, 870 (Tex.2009) (op. on reh'g); Reliance Steel, 267 S.W.3d at 873. 47 . Interstate Northborough P’ship, 66 S.W.3d at 220. 48 . Serv. Corp. Int'l v. Guerra, 348 S.W.3d 221, 236 (Tex.2011). 49 . Id. 50 . See Sw. Country Enters., 991 S.W.2d at 493. 51 . See id. at 493-94; see also Tex.R.App. P. 33.1(a)(1)(B), 33.2; Tex.R. Evid. 103(a)(2). 52 . See Taveau v. Brenden, 174 S.W.3d 873, 876-77 (Tex.App.-Eastland 2005, pet. denied) (<HOLDING>). 53 . See Amoco Chems. Corp. v. Stafford, 663
holding that appellate court may only review issues actually presented to and considered by the trial court holding that requirements of apprendi were not met where facts on which sentence enhancement was based were not charged and submitted to the jury holding that a remand and possibly an evidentiary hearing was necessary for reconsideration of the plaintiffs claim for injuries allegedly caused by the states negligent failure to maintain a public highway because court of appeals could not tell whether parties presented and court considered all relevant evidence on the issue holding evidentiary issues waived because court could not tell based on reporters transcription where tapes were stopped and started and which parts of tapes were actually heard by jury holding that issues not raised before a district court are waived on appeal