Cited by

But because “the best interests of [a] child trump the consequences ordinarily imposed for violations of the rules,” ¶ 10 (App. 2013), we decline to apply waiver here.

¶ 15 (App. 2013) (collecting cases).

We review a superior court’s parenting time order for an abuse of discretion, ¶ 11 (App. 2013), and will affirm if the court’s ruling is supported by substantial evidence, ¶ 16 (App. 2009).

The requirement for specific best-interests findings cannot be waived.2 ¶ 17 (App. 2021); -73, ¶¶ 7-10 (App. 2013).

¶ 10 (App. 2013) (noting that the child’s best interests trump the discretionary doctrine of waiver).

The decision to find waiver, however, is discretionary, Logan B. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, ¶ 9 (App. 2018), and because the best interests of a child are at stake, we decline to do so here and will address the merits, ¶ 10 (App. 2013).

¶ 10 (App. 2013) (the best interests of a child trump the discretionary doctrine of waiver).

¶ 10 (App. 2013) (“[I]f the best interests of the child trump the consequences ordinarily imposed for violations of the rules, then they should not be ignored under the discretionary doctrine of waiver.”).

(change of circumstances); ¶ 11 (App. 2013) (best- interests findings); ¶ 16 (App. 2009) (credibility assessments and weighing evidence); ¶ 9 (App. 2019) (legal decision-making and parenting time); ¶ 7 (App. 2017) (child support); Murray

¶ 10 (App. 2013) (the best interests of a child trumps the discretionary doctrine of waiver).

¶ 10 (App. 2013) (“[I]f the best interests of the child trump the consequences ordinarily imposed for violations of the rules, then they should not be ignored under the discretionary doctrine of waiver.”).

§ 25-403(B); ¶ 11 (App. 2013) (explaining court must make specific findings stating why its decision is in the child's best interests).

¶ 9 (App. 2013); ¶ 10 (App. 2013) (noting that the child’s best interests trump the discretionary doctrine of waiver).

DISCUSSION ¶5 Mother did not file an answering brief, which we could interpret as a confession of error, ¶ 9 (App. 2014), but we reach the merits in the exercise of our discretion because the best interests of three children stand in the balance, ¶ 10 (App. 2013) (the best interests of a child trumps the discretionary doctrine of waiver).

¶ 10 (App. 2013) (“[F]ailure to raise the issues with the family court does not prevent [this Court] from considering [an] argument that the family court erred by failing to make the required statutory findings.”).

¶ 9 (App. 2013); ¶ 10 (App. 2013) (the best interests of a child trumps the discretionary doctrine of waiver).

.” ¶ 8 (App. 2020) ( ¶ 10 (App. 2013)).