Cited by

ting weekends.” Father argues the decision “fails to consider the evidence that points to a significantly dysfunctional relationship between Mother and her children.” ¶15 To modify a final legal decision making or parenting time order, “the court must first determine whether there has been a material change in circumstances affecting the welfare of the child[ren].”

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) ().

Adequate cause is determined by “whether there has been a material change in circumstances affecting the welfare of the child.”

(joint custody arrangement became logistically impossible when mother and daughter relocated out of state).4 4 We decline to address Father’s argument that the court’s decisions to designate Mother as the primary residential parent and to allow him only four hours of supervised parenting time

See, ¶ 14 (App. 2013); ¶ 7 (App. 2003)

¶26 The statutory requirements balance the competing interests of “the need for stability in the child’s life versus the need to change a previous order if that is necessary to place the child in a more suitable environment.”

These statutory requirements balance the competing interests of “the need for stability in the child’s life versus the need to change a previous order if that is necessary to place the child in a more suitable environment.”

See, e.g., Black, 114 Ariz. at 284 (change of circumstances included that petitioning parent had remarried); –36 (1960) (change of circumstances included age of the child, child’s desire to visit the other parent more frequently, and increased distance between the child and noncustodial parent); –49 (App. 1994) (change of circumstances was that joint custody became “logistically impossible”); see also Burk, 68 Ariz. at 309 (petitioner not entitled to modification when no evidence existed of chan

“The [superior] court has broad discretion in determining changed circumstances.”

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

A court must then determine if that change constitutes a “material change in circumstances affecting the welfare of the child.” Vincent v. Nelson, 238 Ariz. 3 WILLIAMS v. FLORES Decision of the Court 150, 155, ¶¶ 16–17 (App. 2015) ().

4 THORNBURG v. THORNBURG Decision of the Court (); ¶¶ 16-18 (App. 2015).

(finding a parent’s move to Montana was a material change in circumstances even though the court’s minute entry did not specifically find any such change); (“[A]s a general rule, an appellate court may infer that the trial court has made the

¶9 To change an existing custody order, the superior court must determine there “has been a material change in circumstances affecting the welfare of the child.”

¶10 To change an existing custody order, the superior court must determine there “has been a material change in circumstances affecting the welfare of the child.”3

To modify a custody or parenting time order, the family court must determine that there has been a “material change in circumstances affecting the welfare of the child.” ¶ 17 (App. 2015) (court did not err in finding no material change warranting modification of legal decision making or parenting time) (); see also Pridgeon v. Super.

“To change a previous custody order, the court must determine whether there has been a material change in circumstances affecting the welfare of the child.” (citation omitted).