Cited by

all of them should be weighed collectively.”

§§ 25-103(B), -403.02(B), -408; (holding that parents’ competing rights “must be adjusted in accordance with the best interests of the child”).

(explaining best interests factors are “weighed collectively,” and “no single factor is controlling”).

(explaining best interests factors are “weighed collectively,” and “no single factor is controlling”).

(explaining the best interests factors are “weighed collectively” and “no single factor is controlling”).

(no single best- interests factor is dispositive, and all factors should be weighed collectively).

¶11 Even if she had raised the issue, the one-year bar established by § 25-411(A) applies equally to parents seeking to relocate when a proposed relocation “would implicate a further change in decision-making or parenting time.” ¶ 9 (App. 2016); (finding the custodial parent’s “proposed move is in the nature of a motion to modify visitation” and when “a parent seeks to remove a child from the state and .

“No single factor is controlling” and all “should be weighed collectively.”

¶4 In its ruling, the family court considered A.L.’s best interests under Arizona Revised Statutes (“A.R.S.”) section 25-408