Cited by

The court must determine “whether there has been a change of circumstances materially affecting the welfare of the child.” ¶ 14 (App. 2020) ().

(trial judge in “best position to determine the issues” and has “wide discretion in deciding what will be in the best interests of the child”).

Instead, the court may modify or reduce parenting time by (1) determining “whether a change of circumstances materially affecting the welfare of the child” exists, then (2) determining “whether a change in custody will be in the best interests of the child.” ¶ 14 (App. 2020) ().

The record supports the court’s finding of “a change of circumstances materially affecting the welfare of the [children].” Backstrand, 250 Ariz. at 343, ¶ 14 ().

DISCUSSION ¶11 When considering a petition to modify legal decision-making authority, the superior court first considers “whether there has been a change of circumstances materially affecting the welfare of the child.” ¶ 14 (App. 2020) ().

(“Only after [the] initial finding has been made may the trial court then proceed to determine whether a change in custody will be in the best interests of the child.”).

(“Only after the court finds a change has occurred does the court reach the question of whether a change in custody would be in the child’s best interest.”); A.R.S.

The court made 4 The family court may only modify legal decision-making or parenting-time if it makes the threshold determination that “there has been a change of circumstances materially affecting the welfare of the child.”

¶ 44 (2007) (errors not effecting the outcome are harmless); (applying harmless error in a family law case).

I. The Parenting Time and Legal Decision-Making Order ¶13 To modify parenting time or legal decision-making, the superior court must first find “a change in circumstances materially affecting the welfare of the child[ren].”

§ 25–1037(B) provisions constituted harmless error

5 BACKSTRAND v. BACKSTRAND Opinion of the Court welfare of the child.” (citation omitted).

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

¶ 15 (App. 2013) (); ¶ 16 (App. 2003) 1 Absent material changes from the relevant date, we cite a statute’s current version.

erially affecting the child’s welfare,” and only if such change exists, then evaluate whether modification “would be in the child’s best interests.” ¶ 15, RICHERT v. BUCK Decision of the Court 1110, 1113 (App. 2013) ( ).

(finding, in marital dissolution and custody action, that trial judge is in the best position to determine the issues and “is given wide discretion in deciding what will be in the best interests of the child”).

(holding a change in circumstances is a condition precedent to modification).