Cited by
Opinions in Arizona that cite Baker v. Meyer, 346 P.3d 998.
- Crewse v. Crewse Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
- McAvoy v. Logan Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
-
McAvoy v. Logan
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
¶ 10 (App. 2015) (citation omitted).
- Mesa v. O'Connor 563 P.3d 1179 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
- Mesa v. O'Connor 563 P.3d 1179 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
- Pedroza v. Pedroza Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
- Pedroza v. Pedroza Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
- Windschill v. Windschill Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
-
Windschill v. Windschill
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
§ 25-103(B); ¶ 12 (App. 2015).
- Decormier v. Cormier Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
- Decormier v. Cormier Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
- Hustrulid v. Stakebake 516 P.3d 18 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
- Hustrulid v. Stakebake 516 P.3d 18 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
- Peralta v. Murray Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
- Peralta v. Murray Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
- Ali v. Elsied Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
-
Ali v. Elsied
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
¶ 10 (App. 2015); ¶ 5 (App. 2016).
- Alcott v. Killebrew Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
-
Alcott v. Killebrew
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
¶ 7 (App. 2007); ¶ 7 (App. 2015) (“We review a parenting agreement de novo because it is incorporated into the dissolution decree and because it is ‘akin to a type of contractual agreement between the parties.’” (quoting Jordan, 221 Ariz. at 588, ¶ 15)).
- Goss v. Goss Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
-
Goss v. Goss
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
at 179; ¶ 10 (App. 2017), and defer to the court’s findings of fact unless they are clearly erroneous, ¶ 4 (App. 2018).
- Daurio v. Daurio Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
- Daurio v. Daurio Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
- Ball v. Ball 478 P.3d 704 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
- Ball v. Ball 478 P.3d 704 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
- Wheeler v. Jones Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
- Wheeler v. Jones Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
- Maria v. v. Dcs, Z.G. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
- Maria v. v. Dcs, Z.G. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
- Ward v. Ward Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
-
Ward v. Ward
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Mother sought: 1 “We view the evidence in the light most favorable to upholding the trial court’s decision.” ¶ 2 (App. 2015).
- Lewis v. Rehkow Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
-
Lewis v. Rehkow
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
¶ 10 (App. 2015); ¶ 7 (App. 2003).
- 10k LLC v. Wvsv Holdings Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
- 10k LLC v. Wvsv Holdings Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
- Russell v. Sahl Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
- Russell v. Sahl Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
- Gonzales v. Vargas Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
-
Gonzales v. Vargas
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
which protect that right absent exceptional circumstances.” ¶ 6 (App. 2015) (quoting A.R.S.
- Paul E. v. Courtney F. 418 P.3d 413 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
-
Paul E. v. Courtney F.
418 P.3d 413
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Baker v. Meyer , , 116, ¶ 10, , 1002 (App. 2015).
- Strong v. Owens Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
- Strong v. Owens Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
- Vanden Bosch v. Vanden Bosch Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- Vanden Bosch v. Vanden Bosch Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- French v. Morin Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- French v. Morin Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- Landry v. Landry Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
-
Landry v. Landry
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
¶ 10 (App. 2015); Manuel M. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
- Kazi v. Saleem Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017