Cited by

¶ 11 (App. 2013) ( ¶ 3 (App. 2002)); see also A.R.S.

¶ 7 (App. 2003) ( ¶ 3 (App. 2002)).

¶ 5 (App. 2002) (holding that the trial court abused its discretion where the court’s order and record did not contain requisite findings under A.R.S.

See id.; -26, ¶ 4 (App. 2002).

Although we could treat his failure to file an answering brief as a confession of error, in our discretion we choose to address the merits “because a child’s best interests are involved.” ¶ 2 (App. 2002).

App. P. 15(c); but are not required to do so, ¶ 2

See Owen, 206 Ariz. at 421-22, ¶ 12, 79 P.3d at 670- 71; -26, ¶ 4

-26, ¶¶ 3, 5 (App. 2002); -33 (App. 1990) (remanding for findings of fact and conclusions of law in compliance with Arizona Rule of Civil Procedure 52, the civil counterpart to Arizona Rule of Family Law Procedure 82).

The superior court has broad discretion over such a decision because the “judge is in the most favorable position to determine what is best for the children,” and this court reviews such a decision for an abuse of discretion, ¶3, Armer, 105 Ariz. at 289, 463 P.2d at 823.

¶ 2, see generally ARCAP 15(c).

¶ 5, see also Reid, 222 Ariz. at 207, ¶ 13, 213 P.3d at 356 (remanding for factual findings where trial court provided no facts to support its determination of the best interest of the child, which was contrary to the recommendation of the court-appointed custody evaluator, and wh

Father failed to file an answering brief, which we may treat as a confession of error; however, we exercise our discretion to address the merits “because a child’s best interests are involved.” ¶ 2

¶ 5, -421, ¶ 8, -70 (App. 2003) (holding that even though the family court referenced A.R.S.

We could treat the failure to file an answering brief as a confession of error by Mother, but in our discretion we choose to address the merits “because a child’s best interests are involved.” ¶ 2, see generally ARCAP 15(c).