With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". for the first time at oral argument. This Court declines to address these issues where they were not addressed either in the district court or in the appellant’s opening brief. State v. Stone, 147 Idaho 330, 334, 208 P.3d 734, 738 (Ct. App. 2009). Because there is no retroactivity issue to decide, we can only determine whether Myers personally submitted to the district court’s jurisdiction when it filed a notice of general appearance on April 6, 2015, almost two weeks before filing the motion to set aside the default judgment. We hold that filing the general appearance, without simultaneously challenging jurisdiction as required by I.R.C.P. 12(g)(1), constituted a voluntary appearance pursuant to I.R.C.P. 4. See Rhino Metals, Inc. v. Craft, 146 Idaho 319, 322, 193 P.3d 866, 869 (2008) (<HOLDING>); Engleman v. Milanez, 137 Idaho 83, 85, 44

A: holding that one of the effects of submitting to the courts jurisdiction by making a general appearance is that a party waives any objection to service of process
B: holding that party waived special appearance
C: holding the notice of appearance was not a motion under rule 12b2 4 or 5 and therefore the filing of the notice constituted a voluntary appearance by the defendants in this action which was the equivalent of the service of the summons upon them
D: holding a general appearance constitutes voluntary submission to the personal jurisdiction of the court
D.