Cited by

An abuse of discretion exists when the record is “devoid of competent evidence to support the decision.” ¶ 19 (App. 2009).

The court abuses its discretion if no evidence supports its decisions, Pridgeon v. Superior Court (LaMarca), or if it fails to make statutorily required findings, ¶ 11 (App. 2009).

in the process of reaching a discretionary conclusion.” ¶ 19 (App. 2009) (cleaned up).

¶ 20 (App. 2019); ¶ 16 (App. 2009).

they are clearly erroneous,” ¶ 10 (App. 2022), we decline Father’s invitation to re-weigh the credibility of Mother’s testimony, (“An appellate court will not weigh the evidence” or “judge the credibility of the witnesses,” as those are “matter[s] within the province of the trier of fact.”); ¶ 16 (App. 2009) (“Our duty on review does not include re-weighing conflicting evidence” or judging “the credibility of the witnesses.”).

¶ 16 (App. 2009); ¶ 11 (App. 2011).

¶ 19 (App. 2009) (citations omitted).

in the process of reaching a discretionary conclusion.” ¶ 19 (App. 2009) (cleaned up).

“Our duty on review does not include re-weighing conflicting evidence.” ¶ 16 (App. 2009).

In re U.S. Currency in Amount of $26,980.00, ¶ 10 (App. 2000); ¶ 16 (App. 2009) (“We must give due regard to the trial court’s opportunity to judge the credibility of the witnesses.”).

¶ 16 (App. 2009) (noting that the trial court is in the best position to weigh the evidence and evaluate the parties’ credibility).

¶9 We will affirm if substantial evidence supports the court’s decision, ¶ 16 (App. 2009), and absent an abuse of discretion, will not substitute our opinion for that of the superior court

Nor has he shown that the court abused its discretion in weighing the evidence and determining credibility, ¶ 49 (App. 2017), particularly given that this court does not reweigh credibility and conflicting evidence on appeal, ¶ 16 (App. 2009).

We defer to the superior court’s credibility determinations.” ¶ 7 (App. 2021) ( ¶ 16 (App. 2009)).