Cited by

¶ 6 (App. 2002); ¶ 9 (App. 2007).

¶ 4 (App. 2018) (parenting time); ¶ 9 (App. 2016) (child support); ¶ 9 (App. 2007) (spousal maintenance); ¶ 4 (App. 2007) (division of community property).

¶ 9 (App. 2007) (spousal maintenance); ¶ 2 (App. 2009) (temporary orders).

¶¶ 15-16 (App. 2007) (holding that such an “award does not violate either 42 U.S.C.

We review a spousal maintenance award for an abuse of discretion, ¶ 9 (App. 2007), and will affirm an award if there is any reasonable evidence to support it, ¶ 14 (App. 1998).

¶9 We review a spousal maintenance award for an abuse of discretion, ¶ 9 (App. 2007), and affirm if there is any reasonable evidence to support it, ¶ 14 (App. 1998).

¶ 19 (2007) (noting that an issue is not properly raised when it is not raised in a pretrial statement or at trial).

Spousal Maintenance ¶12 Father contends Mother was ineligible to receive spousal maintenance and that the court’s award failed to consider “all prepared testimony and evidence.” We review a spousal maintenance award for an abuse of discretion, ¶ 9 (App. 2007), and will affirm an award if there is any reasonable evidence to support it, Gutierrez, 193 Ariz. at 348, ¶ 14.

¶7 Husband argues Wife’s request at trial for “spousal maintenance, in an amount greater than” she requested in her pretrial statement, “was not an issue properly before the court.” Husband claims Wife’s pretrial statement request “amended” the pleading, “narrowed” the issues, and “placed a cap on the requested amount.” where this court held that a life insurance provision used to secure spousal maintenance was not properly before the court because life insurance was not listed as a contested is

Although a pretrial statement may supersede the pleadings and control the subsequent course of the litigation, ¶ 19 (App. 2007), the court could not enter judgment against Valerie based only on a general statement that she owed Robert a share of these mortgage payments under the Decree.

Law P. 76.1(e)(7) (requiring pretrial statements to include “detailed and concise statements of contested issues of fact and law”); ¶ 19 (App. 2007) (“The pretrial statement controls the subsequent course of the litigation.” (citation omitted)).

76.1(g)(6); ¶ 19 (App. 2007) (construing identical provision in civil rules).

¶ 19 (App. 2007) (noting issue is not properly before the superior court when not raised in pretrial statement or at trial).

¶ 22 (App. 2007) ("Section 25-324 requires us to examine both the financial resources and the reasonableness of the positions of each party.").

¶ 9 (App. 5 DOLE v. DOLE Decision of the Court 2016) (child support); ¶ 9 (App. 2007) (spousal maintenance).

¶20 ¶ 19 (App. 2007), Husband should be bound by his pretrial statement, which stated that if Wife disagreed with his valuation, the rental properties should be sold.

¶ 19 (App. 2007) (noting that a joint pretrial statement controls the subsequent course of the litigation).

¶ 6 (App. 2014) (attorney’s fees); ¶ 9 (App. 2007) (spousal maintenance).

¶ 19 (App. 2007) (citation omitted) (holding that listing a community asset “in earlier papers” without including it in the pretrial statement did not place the issue properly before the court).