Cited by

¶ 33 (App. 2011); ¶ 5 n.2 (App. 2015).

P. 52(a)); ¶ 12 (App. 2015) (If a party makes a Rule 82(a) request, “[i]t must be clear from the family court’s findings how the court arrived at its mathematical figure.” (citation omitted)); (“Had either party requested findings of fact or conclusions of law in this case, t

“One of the purposes of [Rule 82(a)] is to give appellate courts the ability to examine the basis for a mathematical figure awarded as child support.” ¶ 10 (App. 2015).

When, as here, a parent timely requests findings of fact and conclusions of law under Rule 82(a), this court “must be able to determine the factual underpinnings of the [superior] court’s ruling.” ¶ 5 (App. 2015).

See DeLuna v. 4 ¶¶ 18–19 (App. 2019) (noting that § 25-403(B) requires findings on the record of all relevant factors in legal decision- making and parenting time cases); ¶ 10 (App. 2015) (explaining that we cannot “infer additional findings necessary to sustain the award” where one party requested Arizona Rule of Family Law Procedure 82 findings the court did not make).

See, e.g., Ruben M., 230 Ariz. at 240, ¶ 24; ¶ 10 (App. 2015); Miller, 175 Ariz. at 299.

¶ 6, (quotations and citation omitted).