Cited by
Opinions in Arizona that cite Hurd v. Hurd, 219 P.3d 258.
-
Wilson v. Wilson
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Boyle, 231 Ariz. at 65-66, ¶¶ 8, 13 ( ¶ 15 (App. 1998), ¶ 19 (App. 2009)).
- Downum v. Downum Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
- Downum v. Downum Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
- Hieger v. Hieger Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
- Hieger v. Hieger Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
- Williams v. Stapley-Williams Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
- Williams v. Stapley-Williams Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
- Brumley v. Brumley Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
- Brumley v. Brumley Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
- Wright v. Wright Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
-
Wright v. Wright
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
-54, ¶¶ 25-26 (App. 2009) (finding significance, and error, in the absence of findings related to several factors enumerated in A.R.S.
- Durbin v. Keller Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
- Durbin v. Keller Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
- Herrera v. Rivero Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
-
Herrera v. Rivero
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
¶ 16 (App. 2009); ¶ 13 (App. 1998).
- Ervin v. Mills Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
-
Ervin v. Mills
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
¶ 13 (App. 1998); ¶ 16 (App. 2009) (“Our duty on review does not include re-weighing conflicting evidence or redetermining the preponderance of the evidence.” (citation omitted)).
- Heuchan v. Lipko Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
-
Heuchan v. Lipko
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
§ 25-403(A), (B); ¶ 11 (App. 2009).
- Strong v. Owens Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
- Strong v. Owens Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
- Engstrom v. McCarthy 411 P.3d 653 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
-
Engstrom v. McCarthy
411 P.3d 653
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Hurd v. Hurd , , 52, ¶ 19
- McDonald v. McDonald Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
-
McDonald v. McDonald
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
ANALYSIS I. Standard of Review ¶15 We will affirm if substantial evidence supports the family court’s decision, ¶ 16 (App. 2009), and will not substitute our opinion for that of the family court unless there has been a clear abuse of discretion
- Lamb v. Nielsen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- Lamb v. Nielsen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- McCreary v. Silver Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
-
McCreary v. Silver
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
“Our duty on review does not include re-weighing conflicting evidence.” ¶ 16 (App. 2009).
- Camargo v. Camargo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- Camargo v. Camargo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- Kazi v. Saleem Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- Kazi v. Saleem Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- Charna F. v. Dcs, C.M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- Charna F. v. Dcs, C.M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- Marriage of Henderson v. Henderson 390 P.3d 1226 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2017
- Marriage of Henderson v. Henderson 390 P.3d 1226 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2017
- Chambers v. Fox Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- Dellaripa v. Dellaripa Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
-
Dellaripa v. Dellaripa
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
§ 25-403(B); ¶ 11 (App. 2009).
-
Chambers v. Fox
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Because we lack appellate jurisdiction to review Father’s objections to the court’s decision, n.2, ¶ 9 (App. 2009), that portion of the appeal is dismissed, 5 C. Attorney Fees ¶8 Father argues the family court erred in denying his request for attorney fees, urging that Mother’s position throughout the proceedings was unreasonabl
- Heroyan-Hamayak v. Hamayak Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- Heroyan-Hamayak v. Hamayak Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- Martinez v. Gutierrez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- Martinez v. Gutierrez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- Hulsey v. Hulsey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
-
Hulsey v. Hulsey
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
–52, ¶¶ 11, 16, – 62 (App. 2009) (appellate court will not re-weigh conflicting evidence or re- determine preponderance of the evidence) (citations omitted).
- Petrocelli v. Anderson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
- Petrocelli v. Anderson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
- Demario v. Demario Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016