Cited by
Opinions in Arizona that cite Marriage of Breitbart-Napp v. Napp, 163 P.3d 1024.
- Dyrek v. Dyrek Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
-
Dyrek v. Dyrek
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
See Dyrek I, 1 CA-CV 23-0237, at *2, ¶ 9; ¶ 13 (App. 2007) (“[W]e determine that whether a separation agreement has merged is of no consequence in determining that the court can reopen its determination that a separation agreement is [or is not] unfair.” (citation modified)); (holding that in the
- Muscarella v. Muscarella Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
- Muscarella v. Muscarella Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
- Fiori v. Leslie Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
-
Fiori v. Leslie
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
§ 25-324 seeks to equalize financial disparities between parties, ¶ 17 (App. 2019) (citing cases), and that the prevailing party is not necessarily entitled to an award, ¶ 39 (App. 2007).
- Beaumont v. Beaumont Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
- Beaumont v. Beaumont Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
- Guerrero v. Guerrero Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
-
Guerrero v. Guerrero
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Alternatively, the court may grant relief under Rule 85 on grounds that include “fraud,” “mistake,” and “newly discovered evidence.” ARFLP 85(b)(1)-(3); ¶ 17 (App. 2007) (noting that a spouse to a property settlement agreement who discovers “fraud, undue influence, or other misconduct” that would have constituted “ground[s] for the trial court not to initially approve a settlement agreement” may seek relief from the provisions of the settlement agreement by post-
- State Guardiola v. Pennington Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
- State Guardiola v. Pennington Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
- Tomsich v. Tomsich Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
-
Tomsich v. Tomsich
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
¶ 39 (App. 2007); ¶ 8 (App. 2008).
- Beaumont v. Beaumont Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
- Beaumont v. Beaumont Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
- Dion v. Wright Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
-
Dion v. Wright
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
¶ 39 (App. 2007) (“A.R.S.
- Rahimian v. Rahimian Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
- Rahimian v. Rahimian Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
- Valente v. Valente Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
- Valente v. Valente Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
- Soldwedel v. Soldwedel Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
-
Soldwedel v. Soldwedel
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
7 ¶ 39 (App. 2007), ¶ 1 (App. 2017) (holding pre-marital agreements stipulating to a prevailing-party standard for awarding attorneys’ fees violate public policy per se).
- Lozano v. Pacco Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
-
Lozano v. Pacco
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
See, –83, ¶¶ 22–31 (App. 2007); –14, ¶¶ 9–23 (App. 1998); Republic Nat.
- Moyer v. Moyer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
- Moyer v. Moyer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
- Aguilar v. Aguilar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
- Aguilar v. Aguilar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
- Fleck v. Antti Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
- Fleck v. Antti Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
- Quijada v. Quijada 437 P.3d 876 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
-
Quijada v. Quijada
437 P.3d 876
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
§ 25-327(A) (“The provisions as to property disposition may not be revoked or modified, unless the court finds the existence of conditions that justify the reopening of a judgment under the laws of this state.”); ¶ 17 (App. 2007) (holding a property settlement agreement is subject to relief under the civil counterpart to Rule 85); Schmidt, 158 Ariz. at 498 (same).
- Buckholtz v. Buckholtz 435 P.3d 1032 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
-
Buckholtz v. Buckholtz
435 P.3d 1032
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
See, e.g. , Breitbart-Napp v. Napp , , 79, ¶ 14, , 1029 (App. 2007) ; Cohen v. Frey , , 67, ¶ 14, , 487 (App. 2007) ; Sharp v. Sharp , , 210, , 309 (App. 1994), superseded on other grounds by rule as recognized in Hutki v. Hutki , , 43, , 808 (App. 2018) ; Keller
- Boyilla v. Boyilla Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- Boyilla v. Boyilla Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- Hoffmann v. Hoffmann Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- Hoffmann v. Hoffmann Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- Evers v. Rose Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- Evers v. Rose Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- Imh v. Aperion Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
-
Imh v. Aperion
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
82, ¶¶ 2, 27–30 (App. 2007).
- Thompson v. Thompson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
- Thompson v. Thompson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
- Guislan v. Helmus Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
-
Guislan v. Helmus
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Moreover, “§ 25-324 does not establish a prevailing party standard for awarding fees.” ¶ 39, (citation omitted).
- Kotara v. Franco Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
- Kotara v. Franco Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015