Cited by

We view the evidence in the light most favorable to sustaining the court’s rulings, ¶ 14 (App. 2019), given it “is in the best position to judge the credibility of witnesses and resolve conflicting evidence,” ¶ 18 (App. 2015).

DISCUSSION ¶7 To modify a parenting time order, the superior court must determine whether there has been a “material change in circumstances affecting the welfare of the child.” ¶ 17 (App. 2015) ().

¶ 17 (App. 2015) (internal quotation marks omitted).

We consider the evidence in a light most favorable to sustaining the court’s rulings, ¶ 14 (App. 2019), given it was “in the best position to judge the credibility of witnesses and resolve conflicting evidence,” ¶ 18 (App. 2015).

¶ 18 (App. 2015); ¶ 16 (App. 2009).

¶¶ 16–17 (App. 2015) (involving legal decision-making and parenting time); ¶ 6 (App. 2010) (involving child support).

at 53, ¶ 22; ¶ 18 (App. 2015) (the superior court “is in the best position to judge the credibility of witnesses and resolve conflicting evidence”).

¶ 18 (App. 2015) (“[T]he [superior] court is in the best position to judge the credibility of witnesses and resolve conflicting evidence, and appellate courts generally defer to the findings of the [superior] court.”).

¶ 20 (App. 2019); ¶ 18 (App. 2015).

¶ 18 (App. 2015) (“[T]he family court is in the best position to judge the credibility of witnesses and resolve conflicting evidence, and appellate courts generally defer to the findings of the family court.”).

The evidence is viewed in a light most favorable to upholding the court's findings since “the family court is in the best position to judge the credibility of witnesses and resolve conflicting evidence, and appellate courts generally defer to the findings of the family court.” ¶¶ 17, 18 (App. 2015).

¶ 18 (App. 2015) (“[T]he family court is in the best position to judge the credibility of witnesses and resolve conflicting 10 BACKSTRAND v. BACKSTRAND Opinion of the Court evidence, and appellate courts generally defer to th

¶ 15 (App. 2013) (); ¶ 16 (App. 2003) (); ¶ 17 (App. 2015) (quoting Canty, 178 Ariz. at 448).

We generally defer to the findings of the court because “the family court is in the best position to judge the credibility of witnesses and resolve conflicting evidence.” ¶ 18 (App. 2015).

Deferring to the fact-finder’s credibility determination, as we must, ¶ 18 (App. 2015) (citing Goats v. A. J. Bayless Mkts., Inc., Husband did not rebut the presumption in favor of community property with clear and convincing evidence.