Cited by

§ 25-325.A to argue the decree was a final judgment.

Thus, we do not reweigh evidence on appeal, ¶ 14 (App. 2013) (citing Jesus M. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.

We do not reweigh evidence on appeal, ¶ 14 (App. 2013) (citing Jesus M. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.

¶ 12 (App. 2013) ("[I]f appellant fails to include necessary transcripts, appellate court presumes they would support superior court's findings.").

See Reeck v. Mendoza , , 302, ¶ 12

As a result, we do not “reweigh evidence on appeal.” ¶ 14 (App. 2013).

Because we do not reweigh evidence on appeal, ¶ 14 (App. 2013), we look to the record only to determine whether the evidence reasonably supports the family court’s decision, see Borg, 3 Ariz. App. at 277.

¶ 14 (App. 2013) (citation omitted).

We do not reweigh evidence on appeal, ¶ 14 (App. 2013), and will affirm if there is any reasonable evidence to support the family court’s order.

¶ 10, (holding “signed support order by the family court is a final decision by its nature,” and entry thereof functions as a final, appealable judgment).

¶8 P.3d 1122 (App. 2013), reached a different conclusion regarding jurisdiction over a family court appeal.

The court of appeals dismissed the appeal from the November 1, 2011 order as untimely, P.3d 1122 (App. 2013).

¶2 Although Food City has not directly challenged the jurisdiction of this court, it has suggested that jurisdiction may be lacking, and “[t]his court has an independent duty to determine whether it has jurisdiction to consider an appeal.”