Cited by

5 MESA v. O’CONNOR Opinion of the Court Superior Court, -74, ¶ 14 (App. 2013).

¶ 10 (App. 2013) (“we agree with the general proposition that, when a party fails to raise an issue before the [superior] court, the issue is waived on appeal[.]”).

¶ 18 (App. 2013); ¶ 11 (App. 2013).

¶25 “[T]he best interests of [a] child trump the consequences ordinarily imposed for violations of the rules.” ¶ 10 (App. 2013).

We review parenting time orders for an abuse of discretion, ¶ 11 (App. 2013), but review questions of statutory interpretation de novo, ¶ 9 (App. 2020).

DISCUSSION ¶8 We review parenting time orders for an abuse of discretion, ¶ 11 (App. 2013), but review questions of statutory interpretation de novo.

¶ 11 (App. 2013); ¶ 14 (App. 2010); ¶ 9 (App. 2007).

“On appeal, we will not disturb the family court’s custody or parenting time orders absent an abuse of discretion.” ¶ 11 (App. 2013).

¶ 9 (App. 2019); ¶ 11 (App. 2013); (explaining the superior court has “broad discretion in determining what will be the most beneficial for the children” and “is in the best position to determine what is in the children’s interest” (citations omitted)).

-74, ¶¶ 10, 20 (App. 2013) (waiver is a discretionary doctrine, not an “unalterable rule,” and the superior court has an “obligation to equitably divide” community property).

¶ 15 (App. 2013) (collecting cases).

are for the [family] court alone to decide.” ¶ 14 (App. 2013) (quoting DePasquale v. Sup.

25, 2022), we refuse to apply waiver 4 SAMANTHA O. v. JEFFREY F. et al. Decision of the Court here because the best interests of the children subject to the termination order trumps the consequences ordinarily imposed for violating procedural rules, ¶ 10 (App. 2013).