Cited by

¶ 4 (App. 2018) (legal decision-making and parenting time); ¶ 16 (App. 2020) (child support); ¶ 12 (App. 2011) (spousal maintenance); ¶ 21 (App. 2024), rev’d on other grounds, (vexatious litigant order).

“[This Court] view[s] the evidence in the light most favorable to sustaining the trial court’s findings and will uphold them unless they are clearly erroneous or unsupported by the evidence.” ¶ 2 (App. 2011) (quotation omitted).

¶ 7 (App. 2011); see also Ariz. R. Fam.

¶ 7 (App. 2011); ¶ 6 (App. 2010); ¶ 5 (App. 1998) (“The trial court’s apportionment of community property will not be disturbed on appeal absent abuse of discretion.”).

to modify or terminate.”) (emphasis added); ¶ 13 (App. 2011).

¶ 13 (App. 2011) (discussing § 25-327(A)).

Law P. 91(A), (H) (delineating procedural requirements for a party seeking post-decree relief); ¶ 7 (App. 2011).

¶ 7 (App. 2011) ( (App. 3 MCCLENDON v. MCCLENDON Opinion of the Court 1995)).

¶ 7 (App. 2011) ( (App. 8 RAZDAN v. RAZDAN Decision of the Court 1995)); ¶ 8 (App. 2010) (

¶ 7 (App. 2011) (spousal support) (); ¶ 10 (App. 2015) (parenting time) ( ¶ 7 (App. 2003)); ¶ 8 (App. 2007) (child support) (citing Litt

Law P. 91(A), (H); ¶ 7 (App. 2011).

1 “We view the evidence in the light most favorable to sustaining the trial court’s findings.” ¶ 2, (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted).

(affirming trial court’s consideration of such benefits in modifying spousal maintenance).