Cited by

And, although “[a] trial court errs if it modifies child support without conducting a hearing or allowing the parties to gather and present their evidence,” ¶ 14 (App. 2012) (emphasis added), here the court declined to modify child support.

§ 25-403.09(A) (“For any parenting time entered under this article, the court shall determine an amount of child support in accordance with [Section] 25-320 and [the] guidelines established pursuant to that section.”) (emphasis added); -80, ¶ 7 (App. 2012) (“[O]nce the court granted Mother’s petition to modify custody, it was required to address child support.”).

§ 25-403.09(A); ¶ 7 (App. 2012) (The obligation to modify child support arises upon granting a petition to modify parenting time under A.R.S.

Because the superior court granted Mother’s petition to modify parenting time, “it was required to address child support.” -80, ¶ 7 (App. 2012).

And we have previously held in the child support context that it is error to enter modifications without “allowing the parties to gather and present their evidence.” ¶ 14 (App. 2012); –06, ¶¶ 17–19 (App. 2011) (vacating child support modification because court “specifically advised that it would not be considering child support” at trial).

§ 25- 403.09(A); ¶ 9 (App. 2012).

¶10 Father first argues he was denied due process because he was “not provided a meaningful time to present [his] exhibits in a meaningful manner.” ¶ 1 (App. 2012), where this court vacated a child support modification order based on a due process violation.

¶ 20 (App. 2014) (citation omitted); see also Heidbreder v. 3 ¶ 14 (App. 2012) (“A trial court errs if it modifies child support without .

¶ 12 (App. 2012) (characterizing this language as setting the “earliest effective date” for modification of a support obligation).

§ 25-403.09(A); -80, ¶¶ 7, 9 (App. 2012).

¶18 Here, Father was deprived of a meaningful opportunity to be heard, ¶ 13 (App. 2012), because the court denied his request for a hearing and never reached the merits of the Petition to Modify Child Support.

§ 25-403.09; ¶¶ 6–7 (App. 2012).

¶ 7 n.1 (App. 2012) (“[T]he pretrial statement controls the subsequent course of litigation .

at *3, ¶ 16 ( ¶ 18 (App. 2016), ¶ 15 (App. 2012), ).

¶13 We reached a ¶¶ 13-16, -93 (App. 2012).

§ 25-403.09 (Supp. 2015); ¶¶ 9-10, (“A.R.S.

–81, ¶¶ 7- 12 (App. 2012) (noting that Family Rule 91’s procedural requirement to file a petition seeking to modify child support is not inconsistent with A.R.S.

allowing the parties to gather and present their evidence.” ¶ 14 , ¶¶ 19-20 , (vacating order modifying child support in part because trial court failed to receive or consider evidence, and directing court to consider such evidence on remand).