Cited by

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).

2 Although mother waived this argument by not developing it on appeal, see ARCAP 13(a)(7) (requiring appellant’s brief to contain argument with citations to legal authority and the record); ¶ 33, (“Merely mentioning an argument in an appellate opening brief is insufficient .

See ARCAP 13(a)(7)(A); ¶ 33 (App. 2011); Ace Auto.

¶ 33 (App. 2011) (“[m]erely mentioning an argument in an appellate opening brief is insufficient,” and doing so constitutes abandonment and waiver).

“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.”).

¶ 36 (App. 2011); ¶ 6 (App. 2004).

¶ 33 (App. 2011); see also Ace Auto.

¶ 36 (App. 2011); ¶ 6 (App. 2004).

¶ 36, (reviewing an award of attorneys’ fees and costs for an abuse of discretion).

§ 25-324’ in the absence of a request.”) ( ¶ 39 (App. 2011)).

¶ 33 (App. 2011) (noting that the failure to argue a claim in the opening brief constitutes abandonment and waiver) ( n.9, ¶ 101 (2004), and Schabel v. Deer Valley Unified Sch.