DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Owen v. Blackhawk, 79 P.3d 667.

176 citing documents.

  • Shifflett v. Porter Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • Shifflett v. Porter Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
    ¶ 7, (custody); (parenting time).
  • Schlueter v. Haskell Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • Schlueter v. Haskell Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • Manola v. Espinoza Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • Manola v. Espinoza Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
    (remanding for factual findings where trial court provided no facts to support its determination of the best interest of the child, which was contrary to the recommendation of the court-appointed custody evaluator, and where order's language indicated the court may have considered other, unidentified factors, in addition to those listed in § 25-403(A), in making its decision); -22, ¶ 12, -71 (App. 2003) (finding abuse of discretion where trial court provided factual findings as to only one statu
  • Dean v. Culp Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • Dean v. Culp Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • Rhoads v. Bar-Haim Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • Rhoads v. Bar-Haim Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • Ryder v. Ryder Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • Ryder v. Ryder Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
    ¶ 5, -421, ¶ 8, -70 (App. 2003) (holding that even though the family court referenced A.R.S.
  • Hope v. Hope Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • Hope v. Hope Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
    § 25-408(H); ¶ 11, (requiring specific findings in accordance with § 25-403(J) when a change in physical custody is involved in a relocation dispute).
  • Christopher K. v. Markaa S. 311 P.3d 1110 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
  • Christopher K. v. Markaa S. 311 P.3d 1110 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
  • Nold v. Nold 304 P.3d 1093 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
  • Nold v. Nold 304 P.3d 1093 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
  • AKSAMIT v. Krahn 227 P.3d 475 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
  • AKSAMIT v. Krahn 227 P.3d 475 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
  • Hurd v. Hurd 219 P.3d 258 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
  • Hurd v. Hurd 219 P.3d 258 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
    § 25-403.03.A (Supp. 2008), given the court’s findings “that there was a significant history of domestic violence.” ¶ 11 “We review the [family] court’s decision regarding child custody for an abuse of discretion.” ¶ 7
  • Reid v. Reid 213 P.3d 353 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
  • Reid v. Reid 213 P.3d 353 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
    -22, ¶ 12 , -71 (App. 2003) (holding that the family court abused its discretion in changing the primary residential parent and altering the parenting time schedule without making the required findings on the record in a contested custody case brought under the relocation statute, A.R.S.
  • Hart v. Hart 204 P.3d 441 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
  • Hart v. Hart 204 P.3d 441 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
    “We review the [family] court’s decision regarding child custody for an abuse of discretion.” ¶ 7