Cited by

¶ 22 (App. 2014) (citing Evergreen W., (“A 4 WILLIAMS v. WILLIAMS Decision of the Court claim .

§ 12- 349(F), and is determined objectively, ¶ 22 (App. 2014).

“Groundlessness is determined objectively[.]” ¶ 22 (App. 2014).

“The statutes governing fraudulent transfers focus on the validity of the transfer itself, providing creditors with remedies not only against the debtor and the property but also against transferees.” ¶ 27 (App. 2014) (citations omitted).

A claim is groundless “if the proponent can present no rational argument based upon the evidence or law in support of that claim.” ¶ 22 (App. 2014) (internal quotation omitted).

¶15 In the context of § 12-349, the term “groundless” is synonymous with “frivolous.” ¶ 22 (App. 2014).

wly discovered evidence that, with reasonable diligence, could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial.” The superior court enjoys broad discretion in deciding whether to grant relief from a judgment or order under Rule 60(b), Skydive Ariz., ¶ 24 (App. 2015), and this Court reviews its decision for an abuse of that discretion, ¶ 12 (App. 2014).

§ 12–349(F); ¶ 22 (App. 2014) (using “not made in good faith” interchangeably with “bad faith”).

§ 12-350, but “the findings need only be specific enough to allow a reviewing court to test the validity of the judgment,” ¶ 22 (App. 2014).

§ 12-350; ¶ 22 (App. 2014).

¶ 10 (App. 2014) (holding “consideration of a Rule 60 motion by a newly assigned judge raises no jurisdictional concerns”); (“The jurisdiction of the court, no matter by which judge it is exercised, is that of the whole court, and not of one judge nor divisi

and ‘when our systematic commitment to finality of judgments is outweighed by extraordinary circumstances of hardship or injustice.’” Birt, 208 Ariz. at 551, ¶ 22 (citations omitted); ¶ 12 (App. 2014) (recognizing that, to set aside a judgment for any “other reason justifying relief,” the movant must “show extraordinary hardship or injustice for a reason other than the five specified in [the Rule’s other subsections]”).

§ 12-350, but “the findings need only be specific enough to allow a reviewing court to test the validity of the judgment,” ¶ 22 (App. 2014).

¶15 Unlike the specific grounds for relief enumerated in clauses one through five, Rule 60(b)(6) is a “broad equitable power” that enables courts to vacate judgments when a party demonstrates “extraordinary circumstances of hardship or injustice.” 187 (1982) (citation omitted); ¶ 12 (App. 2014).