Cited by

¶8 We review the decision to award child support arrearages for an abuse of discretion, and accept the trial court’s findings of fact unless clearly erroneous, ¶ 6 (App. 2004).

“We ‘accept the trial court’s findings of fact unless they are clearly erroneous.’” ¶ 6 (App. 2004) (citation omitted).

Although we defer to the court’s factual findings unless clearly erroneous, ¶ 13 (App. 2015) (citing City of Tucson v. Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc., ¶ 58 (App. 2008)), we are not bound by its conclusions of law, ¶ 6 (App. 2004).

Although we defer to the court’s factual findings unless clearly erroneous, Schickner, 237 Ariz. at 197, ¶ 13 (citing City of Tucson v. Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc., ¶ 58 (App. 2008)), we are not bound by its conclusions of law, ¶ 6 (App. 2004).

§ 25-324(A), ¶ 12 (App. 2004)).

¶ 10 (App. 2014); ¶ 6 (App. 2004); ¶ 8 (App. 2012) ("We review challenges to the trial court's subject matter jurisdiction and questions involving the application and interpretation of court rules de novo.").

Although a court, after considering the parties’ financial resources and the reasonableness of the positions taken by each party throughout the proceedings, may award attorneys’ fees, it is “not required to do so.” ¶ 12, see A.R.S.

at ¶ 15; ¶ 10 , (following “United States Rule” to apply father’s child support payments to interest arrearage first and principal arrearage second).

may order” one party to pay a reasonable amount toward the attorney fees of the other) (emphasis added); (noting “court may .