Cited by

¶ 15 (App. 2008) (“It is for the trial court to determine how much weight to give each of these factors.”).

But the reasonableness of legal positions are “evaluated by an objective standard of reasonableness.” ¶ 10 (App. 2008).

reasonableness of the positions each party has taken throughout the [current] proceedings,” order a party to pay the other party’s costs and expenses.); ¶ 10 (App. 2008) (The court must evaluate the propriety of a litigant’s legal position by an objective standard of reasonableness.).

-49, ¶¶ 9-10 (App. 2008) (the reasonableness position in A.R.S.

§ 25-324; ¶ 11 (App. 2008).

d costs because Husband “acted unreasonably throughout [the] matter.” She does not contest the court’s finding of “no substantial disparity of financial resources between the parties” or that neither party “knowingly presented a false claim.” ¶19 “We review a trial court’s denial of a party’s request for an award of attorney fees for an abuse of discretion.” ¶ 8 (App. 2008).

First, Wheeler had access to the court’s electronic docket as an involved party, see Haroutunian v. Valueoptions, Inc., ¶ 41 (App. 2008) (Brammer, J., dissenting), and although he was a self- represented litigant in the preceding lawsuits, that did not excuse his requirement of investigation and follow up, ¶ 13 (App. 2008) (stating courts hold such parties “to the same standards as attorneys with respect to familiarity with required procedures and .

This argument is unavailing; self-represented litigants “are held to the same standards as attorneys.” ¶ 13 (App. 2008).

See, e.g., Keefer v. Keefer, 225 9 KNOEBEL v. KNOEBEL Decision of the Court Ariz. 437, 441–42, ¶¶ 16–17 (App. 2010); –49, ¶¶ 10, 12 (App. 2008).

-84, ¶ 24 (2017); ¶ 13 (App. 2008) (“Parties who choose to represent themselves .

¶ 39 (App. 2007); ¶ 8 (App. 2008).

§ 25-324(A); ¶ 9 (App. 2008).

See In re 6 ¶ 12 (App. 2008) (holding that the reasonableness of a litigant’s position under § 25-324(A) is determined by an objective standard).

See ARCAP 13(a)(5), (7) (appellate brief shall contain citations of legal authorities and references to the record in support of recitation of facts and argument); ¶ 62 (App. 2009) (failure to comply with Rule 13 of the Arizona Rules of Civil Appellate Procedure can constitute waiver of that claim); ¶ 13 (App. 2008) (self-representing parties “are entitled to no more consideration than if they had been represented by counsel and are held to the same standards as attorneys with respect to familia

¶ 14 (App. 2008) (noting the determination of the parties’ financial resources and reasonableness is left to the sound discretion of the family court).

¶¶ 9–10 (App. 2008) (quotation and citation omitted).