Cited by

¶10 But it is a party’s burden to present evidence, not the court’s. See Troutman v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., (“The party who asserts a fact has the burden to establish that fact.”); ¶ 27 (App. 1998) (A party cannot fail to offer certain evidence and then complain that the superior court abused its discretion by ignoring that evidence.).

¶ 1, n.1 (App. 2007); ¶ 13 (App. 1998).

Where evidence is conflicting, “[w]e will defer to the trial court’s determination of witnesses’ credibility and the weight to give conflicting evidence.” ¶ 13 (App. 1998).

¶ 13 (App. 1998); see also Kocher v. Dep’t of Revenue, ¶ 9 (App. 2003) (“A finding of fact is not clearly erroneous if substantial evidence supports it, even if substantial conflicting 12 NORTH SCOTTSDALE v. CORE CENTER, et al.

¶ 13 (App. 1998) (explaining we defer to the trial court’s determination of witness credibility and weighing of conflicting evidence).

¶ 13 (App. 1998) (“The evidence in this case was conflicting.

It is true that a spouse may have a claim for reimbursement against “abnormal or excessive expenditures” of community funds by the other spouse upon showing that the community funds were “waste[d].” ¶ 7 (App. 1998).

We thus review the superior court’s decision regarding whether changed circumstances exist for an abuse of discretion because it is a factual inquiry, see id., and defer to the superior court sitting as fact finder, –48, ¶ 13 (App. 1998).

In any event, this court “defer[s] to the trial court’s determination of witnesses’ credibility and the weight to give conflicting evidence.” ¶ 13 (App. 1998); (“If an expert fails to calculate the value of an asset according to standard methodology, that failure goes to the weight of the expert’s opinion.”).

¶ 13 (App. 1998) (deferring to the family court on determinations of witness credibility and the weight given to conflicting evidence).

We defer to the superior court’s credibility determinations and the weight it gave any conflicting evidence, ¶ 13 (App. 1998), and we will not set aside the court’s findings of fact unless they are 3 ACUNA v. PINEDA Decision of the Court clearly erroneous, Ariz. R. Fam.

We defer to the superior court’s “determination of witnesses’ credibility and the weight to give conflicting evidence.” ¶ 13 (App. 1998).

2 DICKEY v. DICKEY Decision of the Court DISCUSSION ¶4 Absent an abuse of discretion, this court will not disturb the superior court’s rulings on division of property, ¶ 13 (App. 2019), spousal maintenance, ¶ 14 (App. 1998), or determinations of violations of preliminary injunctions