Cited by

“Merely mentioning an argument in an appellate opening brief is insufficient.” ¶ 33 (App. 2011).

¶ 33 (App. 2011) (“Merely mentioning an argument in an appellate opening brief is insufficient.”).

¶ 101 n.9 (2004) (“Merely mentioning an argument is not enough: ‘In Arizona, opening briefs must present significant arguments, supported by authority, setting forth an appellant’s position on the issues raised.”’); ¶ 33 (App. 2011) (determining that wife abandoned and waived argument by failing to cite any law or facts to support her position).

¶ 33 (App. 2011) (“Merely mentioning an argument in an appellate opening brief is insufficient.”); Odom v. Farmers Ins.

“Merely mentioning an argument in an appellate opening brief is insufficient.” ¶ 33 (App. 2011).

However, “[m]erely mentioning an argument in an appellate opening brief is insufficient.” ¶ 33 (App. 2011).

The moving party must prove circumstances have sufficiently changed by a comparison with either the circumstances existing at dissolution, ¶ 12 (App. 2011), or, if the court has modified the original decree, the circumstances existing at the issuance of “the latest court order,” McClendon, 243 at 402, ¶ 10.

ARCAP 13(a)(7)(A); ¶ 33 (App. 2011) (“Merely mentioning an argument in an appellate opening brief is insufficient.”).

§ 25-324, the superior court may order one party to pay attorney fees and costs after considering “the financial resources of both parties and the reasonableness of the positions each party has taken throughout the proceedings.” ¶ 36 (App. 2011).

A failure to object in the superior court “constitutes a waiver.” ¶ 39 (App. 2011).

¶10 A marital separation agreement is a contract, see Muchesko v. Muchesko , , 268, , 24 (App. 1997), and when a property settlement agreement is incorporated into a decree, contract law governs the agreement, MacMillan v. Schwartz , , 588, ¶ 12, , 1217 (App. 2011).

¶ 33 (App. 2011) (“Merely mentioning an argument in an appellate opening brief is insufficient.”).

1, 2018); ¶ 36 (App. 2011).

§ 13-4071 does not specify that grand jury subpoenas are invalid if these reporting obligations are not met, and the statute does not specify a v. Bolton, ¶ 33 (App. 2011).

Myrick, 235 Ariz. at 494-95, ¶ 10 ( ¶ 39 (App. 2011)).

Section 25-324(A) does not require the superior court to specifically itemize the fees and costs incurred as Mother argues, ¶ 39 (App. 2011), and Mother provides no legal authority to support her argument.

¶ 36 (App. 2011); ¶ 8 (App. 2008).